The  person  charging  this  material  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  return  to  the  library  from 
which  it  was  withdrawn  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  for  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  LIBRARY  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


L161  — 0-1096 


TWENTY-FIFTH  INFANTRY 

COMPANIES  B,  C,  AND  D 

I do  not  ask  for  these  soldiers  either  pardon  or  clemency,  but  vindica- 
tion from  the  charge  of  crime,  of  which  I am  convinced  they  are  abso- 
lutely innocent. 


SPEECH 


OF  * 

HON.  MORGAN  G.  BULKELEY 


IN  THE 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


MAY  4,  1908 


“Even  a Senator  of  the  United  States  might  better  form  his  own 
opinions  rather  than  adopt  those  even  of  the  highest  authority,  when 
the  only  question  involved  is  one  of  justice.” 


AVASIIINTGrTONT 

1908 


4181G— 7?3S 


Digitized  by  the  internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


I 


https://archive.org/details/twentyfifthinfanOObulk 


"aJell  V\ 


SPEECH 

OF 

HON.  MORGAN  G.  BULKELEY. 


The  Senate  having  under  consideration  the  bill  (S.  5729)  to  correct 
the  records  and  authorize  the  reenlistment  of  certain  noncommissioned 
otBcers  and  enlisted  men  belonging  to  Companies  B,  C.  and  D of  the 
Twenty-fifth  United  States  Infantry  who  were  discharged  without  honor 
under  Special  Orders,  No.  26(5,  War  Department,  November  9,  1906, 
and  the  restoration  to  them  of  all  rights  of  v/hich  they  have  been  .de- 
prived on  account  thereof — 

Mv.  BULKELEY  said : 

Mr.  President  : The  duties  imposed  upon  the  Committee  on 
< y Military  Affairs  under  the  terms  of  the  resolution  instructing 
/ that  committee  to  investigate  the  affray  at  Brownsville,  Tex., 
on  the  night  of  August  13-14,  190G,  were  of  an  exceptional  char- 
acter. The  conclusions  of  such  investigation  involved  not  only 
the  honor  of  the  Army,  but  the  good  character,  both  as  men  and 
soldiers,  of  all  the  men  of  the  battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  In- 
fantry stationed  at  Fort  Brown,  Tex.  (Companies  B,  C,  and 
D),  but  collaterally  the  four  regiments  of  colored  troops  of  the 
United  States  Army,  of  which  those  companies  whose  conduct 
is  now  in  question  have  become  the  prominent  representatives, 
and  by  whose  conduct,  in  a measure,  the  future  status  of  the 
colored  soldier  in  the  Army  of  the  United  States  is  to  be  deter- 
mined. 

The  committee  entered  upon  this  investigation  with  a determi- 
nation, if  possible,  to  probe  all  the  circumstances  connected  with 
the  affray;  to  elicit  all  the  facts  so  far  as  they  could  be  ascer- 
tained; to  obtain  all  the  evidence,  both  direct  and  circumstan- 
tial, that  would  enable  the  committee  to  identify  the  guilty  par- 
ticipants, whether  soldiers  or  others  possibly  guilty,  and  have 
perfonhed  all  these  duties  with  which  they  were  intrusted,  and 
have  gathered  and  reported  all  the  evidence  now  obtainable.  I 
am  of  the  opinion  that  a visit  by  the  committee  to  the  scene  of 
the  affray  and  a personal  inspection  of  the  military  post  of  Fort 
Brown,  the  city  of  Brov/nsvilie,  and  the  surrounding  country, 
an  examination  on  the  ground  of  all  conditions  there  prevailing, 
both  by  day  as  well  as  by  night,  would  have  greatly  aided  the 
committee  in  drawing  just  and  fair  conclusions  from  the  mass 
of  evidence  submitted  for  consideration.  All  the  preliminary 
investigations  upon  which  the  order  of  the  President  dismissing 
the  troops  from  the  Army  appear,  from  the  records,  to  have 
been  instituted  on  the  theory  that  the  men  of  the  battalion  sta- 
tioned at  Fort  Brown  were  guilty  participants  in  the  affray. 
See  orders  General  Garlington  (p.  109,  S.  Doc.  155)  ; 

The  I’resident  directs  that  you  proceed  to  the  places  named  in  the  ac- 
companying letter  and  endeavor  to  secure  information  that  will  lead  to 
the  apprehension  and  punishment  of  the  men  of  the  Twenly-fiftli  In- 
fantry believed  to  have  participated  in  the  riolons  disturl)ance  which 
41816—77:58  3 


4: 


occurred  in  Brownsville,  Tex.,  on  the  night  of  the  13th  of  August, 
1906.  * * * And  in  this  connection  the  President  further  author- 

izes you  to  make  known  to  those  concerned  that  unless  such  enlisted 
men  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  as  may  have  knowledge  of  the  facts 
relating  to  the  shooting,  killing,  and  riotous  conduct  on  the  part  of  the 
men  with  the  organizations  serving  at  Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  on  the  night 
of  August  13,  1906,  report  to  you  such  facts  and  all  the  circumstances 
within  their  knowledge  which  will  assist  in  apprehending  the  guilty 
parties,  orders  will  he  issued  from  the  War  Department  discharging 
every  man  in  Companies  B,  C,  and  D of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  with- 
out honor,  etc. 

Mr.  BURIiOWS.  To  wliom  was  tlie  order  issued? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  To  Major  Blocksom.  The  investigation 
of  the  citizens’  committee  appointed  the  day  after  the  affray  in 
Brownsville  from  the  inquiries  instituted  indicate  the  same 
thought;  and  I will  read  a question  and  answer  That  were 
propounded  not  only  to  one  but  to  almost  every  vritness  who 
was  called  before  the  committee. 

Investigation  by  citizens’  committee,  page  82,  Senate  Docu- 
ment No.  155 : 

Q.  We  are  inquiring  into  the  matter  of  last  night,  with  a view  to 
ascertaining  who  the  guilty  parties  are.  We  know  they  were  negro 
soldiers. 

Page  85: 

Q.  You  know  the  object  of  this  meeting.  We  know  that  this  outrage 
was  committed  by  negro  soldiers.  We  want  any  information  that  will 
lead  to  a discovery  of  whoever  did  it. 

Page  110:  Orders  to  Lieutenant-Colonel  Lovering,  September 
24,  190G: 

Sir  : By  direction  of  the  division  commander,  I inclose  you  here- 
with the  affidavits  of  * * * with  reference  to  certain  troubles 

which  occurred  at  Brownsville,  Tex.,  between  soldiers  of  the  Twenty- 
fifth  Infantry  and  civilians. 

Hearings,  part  2,  page  11 : Report  of  Major  Blocksom  and 
M.  D.  Purdy,  assistant  to  the  Attorney-General : 

1.  Testimony  with  reference  to  the  assembling  of  the  soldiers,  the 
shooting  from  the  barracks  behind  the  garrison  wall,  the  climbing  over 
the  garrison  wall,  and  the  shooting  into  the  houses  on  the  Garrison 
road,  etc. 

Page  162,  part  2 : Affidavit  of  Major  Blocksom : 

* * * I am  a major  and  inspector-general  in  the  United  States 

Army  ; that  on  the  22d  day  of  December,  1906,  I was  duly  authorized 
and  directed  by  the  Secretary  of  War,  through  the  proper  official 
channels,  to  go  to  Brownsville  and  other  places  in  the  State  of  Texas, 
for  the  purpose  of  investigating  the  shooting  affray  committed  in  the 
city  of  Brownsville  on  the  night  of  the  13th  of  August,  1906,  in  which 
it  was  alleged  that  certain  members  of  Com.panies  B,  C,  and  D of 
the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  were  implicated,  etc. 

I bave  been  particular  to  recall  all  tbe  orders  issued  on  wbich 
this  order  of  dismissal  was  founded,  including  some  extracts 
from  the  proceedings  of  the  citizens’  committee  to  verifj^  my 
conclusions — that  up  to  the  commencement  of  the  investigation 
by  the  Senate  Committee  on  Military  Affairs  it  was  practically 
assumed  by  the  military,  executive,  and  civil  authorities  that 
the  troops,  or  some  of  them,  were  guilty  of  the  “ shooting  up 
of  the  town,”  notwithstanding  their  persistent  denial  on  all 
occasions  of  participation  in  the  affray  or  any  knowledge  of 
parties  engaged  in  the  murderous  raid — such  protestations  of 
innocence  and  lack  of  knowledge  were  at  once  construed  as 
eufiicient  evidence  of  an  additional  crime,  “a  conspiracy  of 
silence  ” to  shield  the  guilty  ones,  of  whom,  it  was  assumed, 
41816—7738 


5 


they  must  necessarily  have  knowledge.  I have  never  had  called 
to  my  attention,  Mr.  President,  in  view  of  the  testimony  sub- 
mitted to  your  committee,  a more  relentless  pursuit  of  men 
accused  of  crime  without  an  opportunity  to  be  heard  in  their 
own  defense,  except  to  protest  their  innocence,  or  guilty  knowl- 
edge which  was  at  once  construed  as  I have  before  indicated. 
It  seems  to  me,  Mr.  President,  that  up  to  the  time  of  the  inves- 
tigation by  your  committee  the  elementary  principle  of  the 
criminal  law  as  laid  down  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  has  been,  unwittingly  perhaps,  violated.  I venture,  as  a 
layman,  to  quote: 

The  principle  that  there  is  a presumption  of  innocence  in  favor  of 
the  accused  is  the  undoubted  lavv^,  axiomatic  and  elementary,  and  its 
enforcement  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  administration  of  our  crim- 
inal law.  (156  U.  S.,  453.) 

And  in  the  same  case: 

A reasonable  doubt,  as  that  term  is  employed  in  the  administration 
of  the  criminal  law,  is  an  honest,  substantial  misgiving,  generated  by 
the  proof  or  the  want  of  it.  It  is  such  a state  of  the  proof  as  fails  to 
convince  your  judgment  and  conscience  and  satisfy  your  reason  of  the 
guilt  of  the  accused. 

And  in  155  Plnited  States,  page  439,  Justice  Brewer  says: 

In  a criminal  trial  the  burden  of  proof  is  on  the  Government,  and 
the  defendant  is  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  a reasonable  doubt ; and 
when  testimony  contradictory  or  explanatory  is  introduced  by  the  de- 
fendant, it  becomes  a part  of  the  burden  resting  upon  the  Government 

to  make  the  case  so  clear  that  there  is  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  the 
inferences  and  presumptions  claimed  to  fiow  from  the  evidence. 

This  prosecution  up  to  this  point,  Mr.  President,  might  more 
rightfully  be  called  a “ persecution,”  for  up  to  the  hour  of  their 
dismissal  these  troops  had  never  been  given  the  opportunity  of 
a hearing,  either  in  a civil  or  a military  court,  if  I except  the 
proceedings  before  the  grand  jury  of  Cameron  County,  in  which 
they  could  not  participate  and  which  resulted  in  a failure  to 
find  an  indictment  against  the  soldiers  under  arrest  and  selected 
by  Captain  McDonald,  of  the  Texas  Bangers,  as  those  most 
likely  to  have  been  participants  in  the  affray.  In  fact,  Mr. 
President,  I am  bound  to  say  that  in  all  these  preliminary  pro- 
ceedings, and  continued  down  through  your  committee's  investi- 
gation, there  seemed  an  earnest  desire  on  the  part  of  every  de- 
partment of  the  Government  connected  with  the  military  estab- 
lishment to  establish  the  justness  and  integrity  of  the  orders  of 
dismissal,  rather  than  to  accord  to  these  men  the  “ presumption 
of  innocence”  or  the  benefit  of  “a  reasonable  doubt”  of  their 
guilt. 

For  nearly  two  years  these  soldiers  of  our  Armj%  with  other- 
wise an  untarnished  record,  have  borne  the  odium  of  accusa- 
tion and  the  disgrace  of  dismissal  from  the  Army  without  honor 
uncomplainingly,  enduring  all  these  months  confinement  to  post, 
additional  and  onerous  military  duties,  l)Oth  by  day  and  night, 
in  an  effort  to  extort  an  admission  of  guilt,  satisfied  that  time 
would  disclose  the  real  peri)etrators  of  the  great  crime  with 
which  they  were  charged;  that  their  good  clxiracter  as  soldiers, 
and  in  civil  life  since  their  forced  I'etireinent  from  the  Army, 
would  win  for  them  that  measure  of  justice  to  which  tliey  feel 
they  are  entitled. 

41816—7738 


At  this  point,  Mr.  President,  in  view  of  what  I have  already 
said  and  in  reply  to  the  earnest  appeal  and  timely  suggestion 
of  the  Senator  from  Idaho,  in  which  I heartily  concur,  that — 

It  is  our  duty  to  say  to  the  people  of  this  country  that  the  party 
which  gave  the  colored  man  his  freedom  will  also  teach  him  that  this 
Government  can  only  be  preserved  by  observing  the  law. 

To  this  warning  to  the  negro  I would  add  that  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  law  by  executive,  judicial,  or  administrative 
authority  the  citizen  and  the  soldier  is  equally  entitled  to  its 
observance  and  protection.  It  seems  to  me  proper  before  pro- 
ceeding to  a discussion  of  the  evidence  in  this  case  to  review 
for  a moment  the  claimed  authority  of  law  on  which  the  dis- 
missal of  the  soldiers  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  is  founded: 

The  fourth  article  of  war,  regulating  the  separation  of  'an  enlisted 
man  from  the  military  service,  reads  as  follows  ; 

“Art.  4.  No  enlisted  man,  duly  sworn,  shall  be  discharged  from  the 
service  without  a discharge,  in  writing,  signed  by  a field  officer  of  the 
regiment  to  which  he  belongs,  or  by  the  commanding  officer  when  no 
field  officer  is  present ; and  no  discharge  shall  be  given  to  any  enlisted 
man  before  his  term  of  service  has  expired  except  by  order  of  the  Presi- 
dent, the  Secretary  of  War,  the  commanding  officer  of  a department,  or 
by  sentence  of  a general  court-martial.” 

The  authority  for  a discharge  from  the  military  service  is 
vested  in  a field  officer  of  a regiment  to  which  the  enlisted  man 
belongs  or  by  the  commanding  officer  when  no  field  officer  is 
present,  and  this  power  is  limited  only  to  the  case  of  an  en- 
listed man  discharged  before  his  term  of  service  has  expired, 
when  the  discharge  must  be  issued  by  the  same  officer,  upon  the 
approval  or  order  of  the  President,  the  Secretary  of  War,  the 
commanding  officer  of  a department,  or  the  sentence  of  a 
general  court-martial.  It  is  evident  from  the  wording  of  this 
fourth  article  that  it  'was  intended,  and  the  practice  and  prece- 
dents in  the  Army  would  lead  to  the  conclusion,  that,  in  the 
case  of  individual  enlisted  men,  the  high  reviewing  officers 
named  in  article  4 — the  President,  Secretary  of  War,  or  the 
commanding  officer — 'were  to  decide  finally  on  the  propriety  of 
the  separation  of  the  soldier  from  the  service  prior  to  the  ex- 
piration of  his  enlistment,  and  on  the  approval  of  the  officer 
named  the  usual  official  named  in  article  4 issued  the  discharge. 
It  conferred  no  powers,  except  of  final  review  and  approval, 
upon  the  President,  Secretary  of  War,  or  any  other  official, 
except  that  the  sentence  of  the  court-martial  might  terminate 
the  service  prior  to  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  service.  For 
the  protection  of  the  soldier  paragraph  146  of  the  Army  Regu- 
lations provides : 

146.  The  character  given  on  a discharge  will  be  signed  by  the  com- 
pany or  detachment  commander,  and  great  care  vill  be  taken  that  no 
injustice  is  done  the  soldier.  If  the  soldier's  service  has  been  honest 
and  faithful,  he  will  be  entitled  to  such  character  as  will  warrant  his 
reenlistment — that  is,  to  character  at  least  “ good,”  Where  the  com- 
pany comraender  deems  the  service  not  honest  and  faithful,  he  shall, 
if  practicable,  so  notify  the  soldier  at  least  thirty  days  prior  to  dis- 
charge, and  shall  at  the  same  time  notify  the  commanding  officer, 
v/ho  will  in  every  such  case  convene  a board  of  officers — three,  if  prac- 
ticable— to  determine  whether  the  soldier’s  service  has  been  honest 
and  faithful.  The  soldier  will  in  every  case  be  given  a hearing 
before  the  board. 

If  the  company  commander  is  the  commanding  officer,  he  will  report 
the  facts  to  the' next  higher  commander,  who  will  convene  the  board, 
ffhe  finding  of  the  board,  wlien  approved  by  the  convening  authority, 
fihall  be  final.  Discharsre  without  honor  on  account  of  “service  not 
honest  and  faithful  ” will  be  given  only  on  the  approved  finding  of  a 
board  of  officers,  as  herein  prescribed. 

41816—7738 


7 


When  an  honorable  discharge  is  given,  following  the  action  of  the 
board,  the  fact  will  he  noted  on  the  discharge  and  on  the  muster  rolls. 

The  proceedings  of  boards  convened  nnder  this  paragraph,  showing 
all  the  facts  pertinent  to  the  inquiry,  will  he  forwarded  by  the  review- 
ing authority  direct  to  the  military  secretary  of  the  Army. 

In  the  case  of  these  soldiers  none  of  the  precautions  provided 
by  this  article  of  war  appear  to  have  been  complied  with.  The 
provision  of  paragraph  14G  of  the  Army  Regulations — 

The  soldier  will  in  every  case  be  given  a hearing  before  the  board^ — 

provided  for  in  the  article  cited,  and  without  whose  approval 
no  discharge  without  honor  could  be  issued — 

Discharge  without  honor  on  account  of  “ service  not  honest  and 
faithful  ” will  be  given  only  on  the  approved  finding  of  a board  of  offi- 
cers, as  herein  prescribed — 

was  most  certainly  disregarded;  it  is  not  claimed  that  any  such 
action  was  taken  or  forwarded  to  the  military  secretary  of  the 
Army  by  the  reviewing  authority,  as  required.  No  court-mar- 
tial was  ever  held  to  try  these  soldiers  for  the  offense  with 
which  they  were  charged,  and  which,  if  committed  by  them  at 
all,  was  certainly  of  the  gravest  and  most  serious  character 
and  subject  to  the  cognizance  of  either  military  or  civil  au- 
thority, as  described  in  the  opinion  of  the  Judge-Advocate-Gen- 
eral  addressed  to  the  Secretary  of  War  under  date  of  Novem- 
ber 23,  1906  (S.  Doc.  155)  : 

If  a soldiei’  commits  an  offense  of  so  serious  a character  as  to  war- 
rant his  discharge  by  way  of  punishment,  charges  are  preferred  and 
the  case  is  tried  by  a general  court-martial. 

These  soldiers  were  never  allowed  the  benefits  of  either  a 
hearing  before  the  board  of  review,  provided,  or  a trial  before 
a general  court-martial,  at  which  they  could  appear  and  be 
heard,  before  their  enforced  dismissal  and  separation  from  the 
Army. 

It  is  true  that  charges  were  preferred  under  the  sixty-second 
article  of  war  against  the  men  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry 
(twelve  in  all),  selected  by  captain  McDonald,  of  the  Texas 
Rangers.  I quote  the  charge  and  specification  in  the  case  of 
Sergt.  George  Jackson,  of  which  similar  charges  and  specifica- 
tions were  filed  against  each  of  the  twelve  men : 

Charge  and  specification  preferred  against  Sergt.  George  Jachson,  Com- 
pany B,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry. 

Charge. — Conduct  to  the  prejudice  of  good  order  and  military  dis- 
cipline, in  violation  of  the  sixty-second  article  of  war. 

Specification. — In  that  Sergt.  George  Jackson,  Company  B,  Twenty- 
fifth  Infantry,  did,  without  authority,  take  from  the  barracks  of  his 
or  other  company  stationed  at  Fort  Ilrown,  Tex.,  one  magazine  rifle, 
calil)er  .30,  model  1003,  and  did,  singly  or  in  company  with  other  party 
or  parties  unknown,  take  part  in  a disturbance  in  the  streets  of  Browns- 
ville, Tex.,  in  which  disturbance  one  citizen  of  said  town  was  killed 
and  another  wounded,  by  loading  with  ball  cartridges  and  firing  said 
rifle  in  said  streets  of  said  town  and  causing  damage  to  property  of  in- 
habitants of  said  town. 

This  on  or  about  August  13,  1900. 

II.  Cl.w  IM.  Sui'rr.ioE. 

First  Lieutenant.  I'ntialion  Adjutant. 
Twenty-sixth  Infantry,  Officer  Preferring  Charge. 


Witnesses;  Sergt.  James  It.  Reid,  Company  B;  i»rivate  Jobn  Ilollo- 
mon,  (tomjjany  15;  Sergt.  Darby  W.  ().  Biowner.  (’onipany  C;  Coi'i)!. 
('harles  II.  Madison,  Company  C ; Coipl.  Willie  II.  Milb'r,  ('otiijjany  C; 
1‘rivate  Charles  IV.  Askew,  (’ompany  C;  I'rivate  .lames  W.  Newton, 
4181G— 7738 


8 


Company  C ; Private  Oscar  W.  Reid,  Company  C ; Corpl.  David  Powell, 
Company  D ; Private  Joseph  H.  Howard,  Company  D ; Private  James  C. 
Gill.  Company  D. 

In  confinement  since  August  25,  190G. 

Rate  of  pay  : $23  per  month. 

Previous  convictions  : None. 


[First  indorsement.] 

Fort  Sam  Houstois^  Tex.,  August  28,  1S06. 

Respectfully  forwarded  to  the  military  secretary.  Department  of 
Texas,  recommending  trial  by  general  court-martial.  Under  paragraph 
9G2,  Army  Regulations,  these  charges  have  been  investigated  by  the 
undersigned,  as  far  as  practicable  with  the  means  at  hand,  and  I am 
of  the  opinion  that  it  is  doubtful  if  the  allegations  as  set  forth  can  be 
substantiated. 

C.  J.  T.  Clarke, 

Major,  Tioentg-sixtJi  Infantry,  Commanding. 

And  for  whom  warrants  were  issued  by  the  civil  authority — 
Judge  Welch,  one  of  the  district  court — but  for  what  purpose? 
Avowedly  and  only  as  the  sufficient  answer  to  the  demands  of 
the  sheriff  of  Cameron  County  for  the  surrender  of  these  men 
to  the  civil  authorities — that  they  were  held  to  answer  for  a 
military  offense,  and  for  the  further  reason  that  authorities 
both  at  Washington  and  at  Fort  Brown  did  not  believe  that 
these  men  would  receive  fair  treatment  from  citizens  or  author- 
ities. 

I ^uote  now,  for  I think  it  is  important  as  showing  the  situa- 
tion there,  from  official  documents,  and  all  my  quotations  with 
a single  exception  during  my  discussion  of  this  subject  w'ill  be 
from  the  documents  presented  with  the  reports  of  your  commit- 
tee and  now  on  the  files  of  the  Senate.  I quote  from  the  official 
record.  Senate  Document  155,  page  4G : 

[Telegram.] 

Camp  Mabry, 

Austin,  Tex.,  August  23,  1005. 

IMilitary  Secretary, 

Mar  Department,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

Following  telegrams  received  from  Brownsville  this  date  : 


Adjutant-Gexeral,  Camp  Mabry, 

Austin,  Tex.: 

Have  placed  3 sergeants,  3 corporals,  and  6 privates  in  confinement 
in  guardhouse  here  on  warrants  issued  by  Judge  Wells,  of  charge  of 
murder,  conspiring  to  murder,  etc.,  to  be  kept  in  confinement  until  re- 
quired by  judge.  I do  not  believe  these  men  will  have  unbiased  trial 
here.  An  effort,  in  my  opinion,  should  be  made  to  have  them  tried 
elsewhere.  I also  fear  for  their  safety  if  turned  over  to  civil  authori- 
ties. in  case  of  mob  violence,  although  authorities  assure  absolute  pro- 
tection. Feeling  here  still  very  bitter.  Request  opinion  on  my  action. 

Pexrose,  Commanding. 


Brownsville,  Tex.,  August  23. 

Chief  of  Staff,  Camp  Mabry, 

Austin,  Tex.: 

Battalion  Twenty-fifth  will  probably  get  away  to-night.  Warrants 
have  been  issued  for  murder,  conspiracy  to  murder,  etc.,  against  3 
sergeants,  3 corporals,  G privates,  and  1 ex-soldier.  They  will  be  turned 
over  to  post  commander — Captain  Preston,  Twenty-sixth  Infantry — for 
safe-keeping,  and  placed  in  post  guardhouse  until  required  by  district 
judge.  Don’t  know  when  this  will  be ; probably  early  part  of  next 
month ; possibly  earlier.  Authorities  pledge  themselves  able  to  keep 
prisoners  from  violence.  Feeiiug  here  high. 

Blocksom,  Major. 

In  view  of  the  excited  state  of  feeling  among  citizens  at  Browns- 
ville, I recommend  tliat  the  Department  of  Justice  be  asked  to  take 
immediate  steps  for  jiroper  defense  of  these  men,  and  that  a change  of 
venue  be  secured  to  some  locality  not  affected  by  local  excitement.  I 
4181G— 7738 


9 


do  not  believe  that  the  lives  of  these  men  will  be  safe  if  they  are 
turned  over  to  the  civil  authorities  at  Brownsville,  nor  will  their  wit- 
nesses be  safe  If  sent  back  to  that  place.  In  view  of  present  feeling', 
action  looking  to  the  immediate  transfer  of  these  men  to  another  place 
of  confinement  pending  trial  is  urged. 

McCarkey, 

B rigadicr-Gencra  1,  Com m cm di ng. 


[Telegram.] 

Camp  Marry, 

Austin,  Tex.,  August  23,  1906. 

Military  Secretary, 

War  Department,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

Following  received : 

“ Brownsville,  August  23. 

“ Military  Secretary,  Department  of  Texa,s  ; 

“One  corporal,”  2 privates,  my  company  (D),  ordered  placed  arrest 
and  left  here  in  connection  shooting  of  August  13.  I believe  these 
men  absolutely  innocent,  and  do  not  believe  will  receive  fair  treat- 
ment from  citizens  and  authorities.  Request  these  men  sent  in  arrest 
with  company,  to  be  tried  before  impartial  tribunal,  or  that  capable 
officer  detained  here  care  for  their  interests. 

“ Lyon.” 
McCaskey. 

Brigadier-General,  Commanding. 


As  I have  before  sn?:gested,  the  reason  why  these  charges  were 
preferred  under  the  sixty-second  article  of  war  are  set  forth  in 
the  letter  of  General  Ainsworth,  The  Military  Secretary  here  at 
.Washington,  now  the  Adjutant-General,  under  date  of  August  25. 
Page  54 : 

[Telegram.] 

The  Military  Secretary’s  Office, 

Washington,  August  23,  1906. 
Commanding-General,  DErART.MENT  of  Texas, 

San  Antonio,  Tex.: 

Confidential.  After  conference  between  Acting  Attorney-General 
and  Acting  .Tudge-Advocate-General,  it  has  been  decided  that  enlisted 
men  of  battalion  of  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  en  route  to  Fort  Reno  must 
be  held  without  privileges  and  under  strict  surveillance  as  being  in 
military  custody  either  as  offenders  or  witnesses  in  Brownsville  case: 
also  that  if  attempt  is  made  by  State  authorities  to  serve  additional 
process  against  Individual  soldiers  of  said  battalion  as  offenders  or 
witnesses  the  men  must  not  be  surrendered,  but  return  to  process 
must  be  made  in  each  case  to  the  effect  that  soldier  is  in  military  cus- 
tody, and  that  as  military  jurisdiction  has  already  attached  com- 
pliance with  process  must  be  deferred.  If  you  can  reach  battalion 
commander  by  wire,  direct  him  to  take  this  course  should  occasion 
arise,  and  act  accordingly  yourself,  if  necassary. 

By  order  Acting  Secretary  of  War  : 

Ainsworth. 

The  Militarg  Seeretary. 

I’age  57 : 

[Inclosure. — Telegram,] 


The  Military  Secretary’s  Office, 

Washington,  August  27,  1906. 

The  Commanding  General,  Department  of  Texas, 

San  Antonio,  Tex.: 

The  action  of  the  State  judge  In  vacating  warrants  already  issued 
against  accused  soldiers  of  Twenty-lifth  Infanti-y  now  detaiiu'd  at 
Fort  Sam  Houston,  Te.x.,  as  reported  in  your  telegram  of  August 
2G,  leaves  no  charges  pending  against  these  soldiers.  You  will  there- 
fore cause  military  charges  to  he  formally  preferred  against  sabl 
soldiers  under  sixty-second  article  of  war,  alleging  pari icipal ion,  j'lther 
directly  or  by  way  of  conspiracy,  or  lioth,  in  Brownsville  dislurbance. 
Orders  for  trial  on  said  charges  must  not  issue  until  invest Igat i«)n 
now  under  way  Is  completed  and  acted  upon  here.  Should  lU'W 

warrants  issue  by  State  authorities  for  said  nccusiMl  soldiers,  <»r 
should  tliey  make  demand  upon  you  for  the  surrender  of  said  soldiei'S 
for  trial  by  State  courts,  make  return  thereto  iu  eacli  case  that  soldiers 
4181G— 7738 


10 


are  now  held  in  military  custody  for  trial  for  the  military  offenses 
involved  in  their  alleged  participation  in  Brownsville  disturbance  and 
that  compliance  with  State  process  must  be  deferred,  and  report  your 
action  to  The  Military  Secretary. 

Instruct  commanding  officer,  Fort  Reno,  to  hold  all  soldiers  of  the 
three  companies  of  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  at  his  post  as  witnesses  in 
military  investigation  now  proceeding  of  Brownsville  disturbance  and  in 
military  trials  which  may  result  therefrom  ; also  to  place  in  confine- 
ment such  soldiers  of  these  companies  as  there  is  reasonable  evidence 
to  believe  implicated  in  said  disturbance,  either  directly  or  by  way  of 
conspiracy,  or  both,  and  to  prefer  formal  charges  against  said  soldiers 
under  the  sixty-second  article  of  war.  Orders  for  trial  on  such  charges 
must  not  issue  until  investigation  now  under  way  is  completed  and 
acted  upon  here.  Should  attempt  be  made  by  State  authorities  to  serve 
additional  warrants  or  subpoanas  at  Fort  Reno,  instruct  commanding 
Officer  to  make  return  thereto  that  the  soldiers  are  held  by  military  au- 
thorities for  trial  for  military  offenses  involved  in  their  alleged  partici- 
pation in  Brownsville  disturbance,  or  as  witnesses  in  such*  trials,  and 
that  compliance  with  State  process  must  for  the  present  be  deferred. 

By  order  Acting  Secretary  of  War  : 

Ainsworth, 

The  Militarij  Secretary. 

(Copy  to  the  Department  of  Justice,  August  28,  1906.) 

Page  51 ; 

[Telegram.] 

The  Military  Secretary's  Office, 

V/ashingtoiij,  August  2ti,  1906. 
Commanding  General,  Department  of  Texas, 

Camp  Mahry,  Austin^  Tex.: 

Confidential.  Following  telegram  just  sent  to  commanding  officer, 
Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  wffiere  battalion  of  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  has  been 
held  since  morning  : 

“ Confidential.  All  men  of  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  wdio  are  now  in  cus- 
tody of  military  authorities,  including  those  for  whom  warrants  have 
been  issued  by  civil  authorities,  will  be  sent  immediately  with  battalion 
to  Fort  Sam  Houston  and  delivered  to  military  authorities  there.  They 
will  be  held  there  until  they  can  be  turned  over  safely  to  civil  authori- 
ties. Battalion  will  remain  at  Fort  Sam  Houston  until  sufficient  white 
troops  reach  there  to  guard  and  protect  prisoners.  Battalion  will  then 
proceed  immediately  to  Fort  Reno.  This  movement  of  accused  men 
should  not  be  announced  in  advance,  and  should  be  made  so  as  to 
avoid  attracting  attention  or  bringing  on  conflict  with  civil  authorities. 
There  is  no  intention  of  taking  these  men  beyond  jurisdiction  of 
State  of  Texas  or  of  withholding  them  from  civil  authorities  a moment 
beyond  time  wlien  they  can  be  turned  over  safely.  It  is  not  believed 
safe  to  leave  them  at  Fort  Brown,  as  the  one  company  to  be  left 
there  is  insufficient  to  do  wmrk  of  shipping  property  and  supplies  and 
at  same  time  guard  prisoners  so  as  to  prevent  their  escape  or  protect 
them  if  need  be.  You  can  make  this  explanation  if  it  becomes  neces- 
sary. The  President  himself  directs  the  action  herein  ordered.  Y'ou 
are"  authorized  to  make  all  necessary  arrangements  with  railroad  com- 
panies without  referring  matter  to  higher  authority,  and  to  arrange 
for  holding  train  at  San  Antonio  for  reembarkation  of  battalion.  Make 
movement  quietly  and  discreetly.  By  all  means  avoid  conflict  if  pos- 
sible, but  see  that  accused  men  and  battalion  are  protected  from  vio- 
lence during  movement.  Instructions  have  been  wired  to  department 
commander,  if  possible,  to  have  troops  meet  your  train  at  San  Antonio 
and  relieve  you  of  accused  men,  so  that  you  can  proceed  direct  to  F'ort 
itcno.  Communicate  with  Department  commander  at  Camp  Mabry,  if 
possible.  Start  your  movement  at  earliest  possible  moment. 

“ By  order  Acting  Secretary  of  War  : 

“Ainsworth, 

“The  Military  Secretary.’^ 

Pages  95-OG : 

Office  of  Ignited  St.\tes  Attorney, 

Southern  District  op  Texas, 

Laredo,  'Tex.,  Scptemhcr  6,  1906. 

lion.  W.M.  H.  Moody, 

Attorney-General,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Sir  : I beg  leave  to  submit  the  following  report  covering  my  investi- 
gations in  the  matter  of  the  negro  soldiers  at  Brownsville,  Tex.  : 

August  28,  ultimo,  I received  a telegram  from  United  States  Attorney 
TilcLemoro  requesting  me  to  go  at  once  to  Brownsville,  Tex.,  “ consult 
41816—7768 


11 


with  military  and  civil  authorities  and  report  in  detail  situation  and 
facts  whether  in  your  opinion  accused  soldiers  can  now  get  fair  trial 
at  Brownsville  and  be  afforded  protection  by  civil  authorities  against 
mob  violence  ; if  not  whether  civil  authorities  will  consent  to  change 
of  venue,  * * * report  to  Attorney-General.”  I immediately 

started  for  Brownsville  via  Monterey  and  Matamoros,  Mexico,  being 
the  quickest  route.  I was  fortunate  on  my  journey  to  encounter  several 
prominent  persons  who  had  been  in  Brov/nsville  the  night  of  the  trouble 
with  the  negroes  and  afterward.  In  order  to  arrive  at  an  opinion 
of  the  feeling  and  conditions  existing  in  Brownsville,  I began  a series 
of  questions  with  them  as  well  as  others  I met  who  could  give  me 
information  on  these  points.  After  arrival  In  Brownsville  I interro- 
* gated  and  consulted  the  military  officer  making  an  inspection  for  the 
War  Department,  Major  Blastock  [Blocksom],  county  judge,  mayor  of 
Brownsville,  chairman  of  the  Citizens’  Protection  Committee,  ex-district 
judge,  collector  of  customs,  inspector  of  customs,  and  citizens  generally, 
poor,  rich,  and  indifferent  races,  endeavoring,  as  nearly  as  possible,  to 
feel  the  pulse  of  the  entire  body  corporate,  and  judge  of  the  sentiment 
existing. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  I ask  the  Senator  if  it  is  not  true  that  in 
an  official  report  made  by  Major  Blocksom  he  also  expressed 
the  opinion  that  there  conld  not  be  a fair  trial  in  Brownsville? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  ‘I  think  you  will  find  that  in  the  record.  I 
do  not  happen  to  have  it  among  my  quotations,  but  I want  to 
quote  a few  words  from  the  assistant  United  States  attorney, 
to  whom  this  question  was  submited  by  the  military  authorities. 
Assistant  United  Statea  Attorney  Hamilton  continues ; 

I found  the  officials,  and  with  very  few  exceptions  all  the  citizens, 
most  frank  and  courteous  in  expressing  their  views  and  opinions  on 
the  matter,  and  I had  no  difficulty  in  determining  that  such  a prejudice 
existed  against  the  accused  negro  soldiers  that  a fair  trial  or  any  trial 
could  not  be  obtained  in  Cameron  County.  In  fact,  some  of  the  best 
citizens  expressed  the  wish  that  the  soldiers  might  not  be  returned 
to  Brownsville  even  for  a trial,  as  they  feared  that,  although  the  citi- 
zens had  acted  with  the  greatest  prudence  hitherto  and  refrained  from 
any  violence  toward  the  soldiers,  some  firebrand  might  start  trouble, 
and,  once  commenced,  no  telling  where  it  might  end.  I also  consulted 
with  the  State  district  judge  and  district  attorney.  They  agreed  that 
it  would  be  impossible  to  try  the  case  in  Cameron  County,  and  the 
judge  gave  me  to  understand  that  the  cases,  if  any  indictment  were 
found,  would  be  transferred  to  some  county  free  from  prejudice,  pos- 
sibly Nueces.  In  going  over  the  evidence  with  the  officials  we  were 
impressed  with  the  difficulty  of  identifying  any  of  the  culprits,  and 
there  is  great  likelihood  that  no  indictments  can  be  found.  The  gov- 
ernor of  Texas  has  offered  a reward  of  .$500  for  evidence  leading  to  the 
conviction  of  the  guilty  ones,  but  it  has  produced  no  evidence  thus  far. 
My  telegram  to  you  from  Brownsville  covered  this  matter  briefiy.  As 
to  mob  violence,  I believe  the  hot-heads  v/ere  governed  by  the  prudence 
of  the  best  counsel  to  refrain  from  any  overt  act.  but  that  this  was 
brought  about  mainly  by  the  fact  that  there  was  a battalion  of  soldiers 
that  would  have  to  be  overcome  to  reach  the  accused,  I think,  can  be 
little  doubted. 

Were  the  accused  to  be  taken  hack  to  Brownsville  for  trial,  should 
indictments  be  found,  and  such  trial  result  in  an  acquittal.  I fear, 
unless  the  accused  wei'e  well  guarded,  there  miglit  be  trouble  before 
they  could  reach  a place  of  safety.  The  city  of  Brov/nsville.  v/ithout 
doubt,  has  suffered  a terrible  and  unreasonable  attack  by  soldiers,  who 
should  have  acted  just  the  opposite  in  affording  them  protection,  and 
they  are  righteously  indignant.  As  iny  instructions  did  not  include  a 
finding  of  the  facts  concerning  the  attack  and  the  crime  committed,  I 
presume  it  is  not  desired.  If,  however,  details  of  the  attack  and  facts 
connected  are  desired,  they  can  readily  l)e  had  from  the  War  Department 
from  Inspector-General,  as  Major  Blastock  [Blocksom]  and  I know 
that  he  was  very  careful  in  gathering  an  unbiased  mass  of  information 
and  facts. 

The  chances  are  that  unless  the  soldiers  clean  up  their  own  quar- 
ters or  turn  State’s  evidence  no  conviction  can  ever  be  had  of  the  guilty 
who  have  caused  the  disturbance  and  trouble. 

I trust  that  I have  fully  covered  the  information  desired  in  this 
report,  and  have  the  honor  of  being. 

Your  obedient  servant,  h.  C.  IIamiltox, 

Assistant  United  Hlatcs  Attorney. 


41816—7738 


12 


PRECEDENTS. 

The  records  of  the  Regular  Army  fail  to  disclose  any  prece- 
dent for  the  discharge  of  a large  body  of  enlisted  men  at  one 
time,  either  prior  to  or  at  the  end  of  their  enlistment. 

I quote  from  letter  of  The  Military  Secretary,  General  Ains- 
'Amrth,  under  date  of  December  10,  1906,  addressed  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  War ; 

No  record  of  the  summary  discharge  from  the  Regular  Army,  prior 
to  the  recent  discharge  of  a battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  of 
a considerable  number  of  enlisted  men  at  one  time  has  been  found. 

Cases  of  the  discharge  of  individual  enlisted  men  without  honor  and 
without  trial  by  court-martial  are  not  infrequent.  The  official  records 
show  that  during  the  fiscal  year  ended  June  30,  1906,  discharges  with- 
out honor  were  ordered  by  the  War  Department,  without  trial  by  court- 
martial.  in  the  cases  of  352  enlisted  men  of  the  Regular  'Army.  Of 
these  86  were  discharged  on  account  of  “ fraudulent  enlistment,”  113 
on  account  of  ” desertion,”  8 on  account  of  “ desertion  and  fraudulent 
enlistment,”  107  on  account  of  “ imprisonment  under  sentence  of  civil 
court,”  and  38  on  account  of  “ having  become  disqualified  for  service 
through  own  misconduct.” 

I ask  that  the  letter  from  which  I have  just  quoted  may  be 
printed  in  full  in  the  Record. 

Pages  312-313,  Senate  Document  155 : 

MEMORANDUM  P’OR  THE  SECRETARY  OF  WAR. 

The  secretary  to  the  President,  in  a letter  dated  December  7,  1906, 
advises  the  Secretary  of  War  that  the  President  wishes  him  to  “ give 
him  some  instances,  of  which  he  knows  there  must  be  many,  where 
the  Department,  the  commanding  generals  of  departments,  or  colo- 
nels of  regiments  have  discharged  men  or  mustered  them  out  without 
honor  in  any  other  way  without  court-martial.” 

A memorandum,  furnished  by  The  Military  Secretary  to  the  Secretary 
of  War  and  by  him  transmitted  to  the  secretary  to  the  President  on 
the  5th  instant,  contained  a list  of  a number  of  instances  of  the  sum- 
mary discharge  from  the  volunteer  service  during  the  civil  war  of  large 
numbers  of  men  because  of  misconduct  on  their  part. 

No  record  of  the  summary  discharge  from  the  Regular  Army,  prior 
to  the  recent  discharge  of  a battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  of 
a considerable  number  of  enlisted  men  at  one  time  has  been  found. 

Pases  of  the  discharge  of  individual  enlisted  men  without  honor,  and 
without  trial  by  court-martial,  are  not  infrequent.  The  official  records 
show  that  during  the  fiscal  year  ended  June  30,  1906,  discharges  with- 
out honor  were  ordered  by  the  War  Department,  Mfithout  trial  by  court- 
martial,  in  the  cases  of  352  enlisted  men  of  the  Regular  Army.  Of 
these.  86  were  discliarged  on  account  of  “ fraudulent  enlistment,”  113 
on  account  of  ” desertion,”  8 on  account  of  “ desertion  and  fraudulent 
enlistment,”  107  on  account  of  “ imprisonment  under  sentence  of  civil 
court,”  and  38  on  account  of  “ having  become  disqualified  for  service 
through  own  misconduct.” 

In  addition  to  the  discharges  without  honor  ordered  by  the  War  De- 
partment, a considera))le  number  of  the  discharges  issued  by  subordi- 
nate military  authorities  must,  under  paragraph  148  (2-d),  Army 

Regulations,  have  been  discharges  without  honor.  That  paragraph  re- 
quires the  blank  form  for  discharge  without  honor  to  be  used  when  a 
soldier  is  discharged:  “(d)  Where  the  service  has  not  been  honest  and 
faithful — that  is,  where  the  service  docs  not  warrant  his  reonlistment.” 
The  number  of  such  rSischarges  can  not  be  ascertained  without  an  ex- 
amination of  the  record  of  each  of  the  many  enlisted  men  who  were 
^discliarged  during  the  year.  Such  an  extended  examination  has  not 
been  made,  because  it  is  believed  that  the  foregoing  statement  with  re- 
gard to  the  discharges  without  honor  ordered  by  the  War  Department 
is  sufficient  to  show  the  general  practice  of  the  Department  with  regard 
to  such  discharges. 

F.  C.  Ainsworth, 

The  Military  Secretary. 

War  Department, 

The  Military  Secretary’s  Office. 

December  10,  1906. 

This  letter  shows  to  what  extent  and  for  what  reason,  in 
individual  cases  01115%  the  powers  conferred  on  the  President, 
41816—7738 


13 


Secretary  of  War,  and  so  forth,  by  the  fourth  article  of  war 
have  been  exercised.  The  otRcial  records  show  that  during  the 
fiscal  j’ear  ended  June  30,  1906,  discharges  without  honor  were 
ordered  by  the  War  Department,  without  trial  hy  court-martial , 
in  the  cases  of  352  enlisted  men  of  the  Regular  Army.  Of  these 
there  were  discharged — 

Eighty-six  on  account  of  “ fraudulent  enlistment.” 

One  hundred  and  thirteen  on  account  of  “ desertion.” 

Eight  on  account  of  “ desertion  and  fraudulent  enlistment.” 

One  himdred  and  seven  on  account  of  “ imprisonment  under 
sentence  of  civil  court.” 

Thirty-eight  on  account  of  “ having  become  disqualified  for 
service  through  own  misconduct.” 

These  are  the  causes  for  the  discharge  without  honor  of  the 
individual  enlisted  men  on  the  order  of  the  President  or  of  the 
Secretary  of  War,  without  a trial,  during  the  year  1906. 

And  again,  under  date  of  December  5,  General  Ainsworth 
writes  to  the  Secretary  of  War : 

A protracted  examination  of  the  ofRcial  records  has  thus  far  resulted 
in  failure  to  discover  a precedent  in  the  Regular  Army  for  the  dis- 
charge of  those  members  of  three  companies  of  the  Twenty-fifth  In- 
fantry who  were  present  on  the  night  of  the  13th  of  August,  1906, 
when  an  affray  in  the  city  of  Brownsville  took  place. 

In  an  effort  to  seek  precedents  an  attempt  is  made  to  show 
that  in  the  case  of  Company  G,  Eighth  Infantry,  United  States 
Army,  occurring  in  1860,  at  that  time  a part  of  the  command  of 
Lieut.  Col.  Robert  E.  Lee,  that  a precedent  can  be  found ; but 
in  that  case  the  men  of  the  offending  company  were  not  dis- 
missed, but  simply  transferred  to  other  companies  of  the  same 
regiment  and  prohibited  from  reenlistment  at  the  expiration  of 
their  respective  terms,  and  the  latter  portion  of  the  order  was 
disregarded,  if  ever  issued,  as  the  Army  records  show.  The 
Military  Secretary  adds; 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  statement  it  will  be  seen  that  the  action 
taken  in  1860,  in  the  case  of  Company  G,  Eighth  Infantry,  is  not  a 
precedent  for  the  action  taken  in  1906  in  the  case  of  the  members  of 
the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry. 

Permit  me,  Mr.  President,  also  to  call  attention  and  to  have 
included  in  full  in  the  Record  as  a part  of  my  remarks,  without 
reading  that  part  from  which  I quote.  Senate  Document  155  and 
Appendix : 

Pages  311-312 : 

Instances  of  the  siimmarjf  (Uschnrpe  of  ichole  organizations  for  mis- 
conduct; also  of  the  summary  discharge,  without  honor,  of  individual 

enlisted  men. 

MEMORANDUM  FOR  THE  SECRETARY  OF  WAR. 

The  Secretary  to  the  President,  in  a letter  dated  December  1,  1906, 
advises  the  Secretary  of  War  that  the  President  would  like  to  have 
him  “look  up  any  precedents  (Lee’s  or  others)  for  the  action  taken 
in  discharging  the  battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  and  if  there 
exist  any  such,  send  them  to  the  President.’’ 

A protracted  examination  of  the  odicial  records  has  thus  far  resulted 
in  failure  to  discover  a precedent  in  the  Regular  Army  for  the  discharge 
of  those  members  of  three  companies  of  the  'rwenty-tifth  Infantry  who 
were  present  on  the  night  of  August  13,  1906,  when  an  affray  in  the 
city  of  Brownsville  took  place. 

The  case  referred  to  as  “ J^ee’s  ’’  by  the  Secretary  to  the  I’resident  is 
undoubtedly  the  case  of  Company  G,  Eighth  Infantry,  concerning 
which  an  interview  with  Mr.  .1.  G.  Hesse  was  recently  iiublished  in  the 
Washington  I’ost.  In  that  interview  it  was  stated  that,  by  order  of 
41816—7738 


14 


Lieut.  Col.  Robert  E.  Lee,  the  member,?  of  Company  G were  transferred 
to  other  companies  of  the  same  regiment  and  prohibited  from  reenlist- 
ing on  the  expiration  of  the  terms  of  enlistment  under  which  they  were 
then  serving.  A search  for  papers  containing  details  of  the  occurrence 
has  resulted  in  failure  to  find  them,  the  original  papers  having  been 
returned  in  1860  to  the  Department  of  Texas,  where  they  were  un- 
doubtedly lost  or  destroyed  at  the  time  of  the  surrender  of  the  troops 
in  that  department  to  the  Confederate  military  authorities. 

The  records  shov/,  however,  that  on  March  18.  1860,  members  of 
Company  G,  Eighth  Infantry,  at  Fort  Davis,  Tex.,  took  from  the  guard- 
house a citizen  who  was  confined  there  and,  without  opposition  from 
the  guard,  hanged  him  to  a tree  near  by  until  he  was  dead.  The 
records  also  show  that  by  order  of  the  regimental  commander  twenty- 
seven  men  of  this  company  were  detached  from  the  company  and 
attached  to  other  companies  of  the  regiment,  “ to  restore  their  dis- 
cipline,” and  that  twelve  other  men  of  the  company  wmre  transferred 
to  other  companies  by  order  of  the  regimental  commander  without  the 
cause  of  transfer  being  stated.  The  regimental  orders  are  not  on  file, 
and  it  is  impossible  to  state  whether  the  reenlistment  of  these  trans- 
ferred men  wms  or  wms  not  prohibited  ; but  as  the  records  show'  that 
some  of  the  transferred  men  did  reenlist,  it  is  evident  that  if  an  order 
prohibiting  their  reenlistment  wms  given  it  was  not  carried  into  effect. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  statement  it  will  be  seen  that  the  action 
taken  in  1860  in  the  case  of  Company  G,  Eighth  Infantry,  is  not  a 
precedent  for  the  action  taken  in  1906  in  the  case  of  members  of  the 
Tw'enty-fifth  Infantry. 

In  the  volunteer  service  during  the  civil  war  there  occurred  numerous 
instances  of  the  summary  discharge  of  large  numbers  of  men  because 
of  misconduct  on  their  part.  Following  are  some  of  those  instances  : 

The  members  of  Company  A,  First  Eastern  Shore  Maryland  Infan- 
try Volunteers,  w'ore  mustered  out  of  service  August  16,  1862,  by  order 
of  the  general  commanding  the  Eighth  Army  Corps  because  they  re- 
fused to  serve  in  Virginia. 

The  members  of  Company  K,  First  Eastern  Shore  Maryland  Infan- 
try Volunteers  w'ere  dishonorably  discharged  without  trial,  July  2, 
1863,  pursuant  to  the  order  of  the  general  commanding  the  Eighth 
Army  Corps,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  Secretary  of  War,  for 
refusing  to  leave  tlie  section  of  the  State  in  w'hich  it  was  claimed 
that  they  had  enlisted  to  serve.  The  action  was  approved  by  the  Sec- 
retary of  War  July  23,  1863. 

The  First  Regiment,  United  States  Reserve  Corps  (Missouri  Infan- 
try). was  mustered  out  of  service  during  September  and  October,  1862, 
pursuant  to  orders  of  the  War  Department,  on  account  of  the  regi- 
ment being  in  a state  bordering  closely  on  mutiny  as  a result  of  alleged 
misunderstanding  as  to  the  terms  of  enlistment. 

Companies  II,  I,  and  K,  Fifth  Missouri  Cavalry,  and  Company  G, 
Fourth  Missouri  Cavalry,  were  mustered  out  of  the  service  of  the 
United  States  w’ithout  trial  by  court-martial,  in  pursuance  of  orders 
from  headquarters  District  of  Mis.souri,  dated  September  20,  1862, 
by  reason  of  mutinous  conduct  and  disaffection  of  the  majority  of  the 
mem.bers  of  those  companies. 

Company  C,  Fremont  Body  Guard,  was  summarily  discharged  by 
order  of  Major-General  Haileck,  November  30,  1861,  on  account  of  the 
members  resfusing  to  be  consolidated  with  any  other  organization  of 
Missouri  volunteers. 

The  members  of  Company  G,  Tenth  New'  Jersey  Infantry  "Volunteers, 
W'ere  discharged  w'ithout  trial  April  8,  1862,  pursuant  to  orders  from 
the  War  Department,  because  they  refused  to  do  duty  as  infantry, 
claiming  that  they  wmre  deceived  into  the  belief  that  they  were  entering 
the  cavalry  branch  w’hen  they  enlisted. 

The  Eleventh  Regiment,  New'  York  Infantry  Volunteers  (First  Fire 
Zouaves),  w'as  mustered  out  of  service  June  2,  1862,  pursuant  to  orders 
from  the  War  Department,  by  reason  of  general  demoralization,  nu- 
merous desertions,  and  at  the  request  of  officers  and  enlisted  men  of 
the  organization. 

The  Sixtieth  Regiment,  Ohio  Infantry  Volunteers,  was  summarily 
discharged  November  10,  1862,  pursuant  to  a telegram  from  the  War 
Department,  because  the  regiment  wms  “ disorganized,  mutinous,  and 
worthless.” 

F.  C.  Aixsw’oaTii, 

The  Militarij  Beevetanj. 

W.AR  Depart M EXT, 

d'liE  Military  Secretary's  Office, 

December  o,  1906. 


41816—7738 


15 


Pages  539-540: 

Appendix  4. 

The  Military  Secretary’s  Office, 

War  Department, 

Washington,  D.  C.,  December  1,  190G. 

My  Dear  Mr.  Loeb  : Herewith  I send  you  a clipping  from  the  Wash- 
ington Post  of  November  28,  1906,  containing  the  article  referred  to 
in  your  note  of  thts  morning. 

The  “ Captain  ” Hesse  referred  to  in  that  article  was  Corpl.  .Tohn  C. 
Hesse,  of  Company  G,  Eighth  Infantry,  and  he  was  clerk  at  regimental 
headquarters  at  the  time  of  the  occurrence.  Subsequently,  when  the 
regiment  was  surrendered  to  the  Confederates  by  General  Twiggs,  Cor- 
poral Hesse  saved  the  regimental  flags  by  wrapping  them  around  his 
body,  under  his  clothing,  and  brought  them  north  in  safety,  receiving 
afterwards  a medal  of  honor  for  his  action. 

Mr.  Hesse  has  been  a clerk  in  the  War  Department  since  1861,  and 
is  now  a chief  of  division  in  The  Military  Secretary’s  Ofiice. 

Very  truly,  yours, 

F,  C.  Ainsworth, 

. The  Military  Secretary. 

Hon.  William  Loeb,  .Tr., 

Secretary  to  the  President,  Washington,  D.  C. 


[Inclosure.] 

[From  the  Washington  Post,  Wednesday,  November  28,  1906.] 

LEE  punished  TROOPS ENTIRE  COMPANY  DISB.INDED  BECAUSE  OF  LYNCH- 
ING  LIKE  THE  BROWNSVILLE  CASE CAPT.  J.  C.  HESSE  TELLS  OP 

AFFAIR  DOWN  IN  TEXAS  JUST  BEFORE  THE  CIVIL  WAR  WHICH  IS  A 

PARTIAL  PRECEDENT  FOR  PRESIDENT  ROOSEVELT’S  NOW  FAMOUS  ORDER 

SOME  FEATURES  IDENTICAL. 

A case  somewhat  similar  to  the  recent  dismissal,  by  Presidential 
order,  of  the  three  companies  of  colored  troops  because  of  the  trouble 
at  Brownsville,  Tex.,  is  that  of  the  discharge  of  Company  G,  of  the 
Eighth  Regiment,  at  Fort  Davis,  Tex.,  in  the  summer  of  1860. 

In  the  Brownsville  incident,  as  a result  of  the  alleged  rioting  of  the 
soldiers,  one  man,  a bartender,  was  killed.  The  victim  in  the  Fort 
Davis  affair  'also  was  a bartender,  he  having  been  lynched  by  unknown 
parties,  supposed  to  be  soldiers,  after  he  had  killed  a member  of  the 
company  by  striking  him  with  his  fist.  The  soldiers  at  Brownsville 
were  ordered  dismissed  without  honor  by  the  1‘resident,  while  the  sol- 
diers at  Fort  Davis  were  transferred  to  other  companies  and  not  dis- 
missed until  they  had  served  out  their  terms  of  enlistment. 

The  latter  incident  occurred  during  the  Administration  of  President 
Buchanan,  l)ut  there -is  no  record  that  the  action  in  the  case  was  taken 
by  virtue  of  any  order  given  by  him.  The  responsibility  for  the  order 
was  assumed  liy  Robert  E.  Lee,  later  the  famous  Confederate  general, 
who  was  at  that  time  in  command  of  United  States  troops  in  Texas. 

NO  RECORD  OF  DISMISSAL. 

Possibly  on  account  of  the  civil  war  breaking  out  soon  after  the 
incident,  or  it  might  have  been  because  of  the  destruction  of  the  records 
in  the  case  before  they  reached  the  Vfar  Department,  it  is  thought  no 
official  record  of  the  dismissal  of  the  company  is  in  existence.  At  least 
so  says  Capt.  .T.  C.  Hesse,  who  is  probal)ly  the  only  surviving  meml)er 
of  the  company,  now  employed  in  the  ofiice  of  The  Military  Secretary 
of  the  Army. 

Captain  Hesse,  in  speaking  of  the  occurrence  yesterday,  said  he  had 
often  regretted  he  had  kept  no  diary  during  liis  Army  service,  refer- 
ring especially  to  the  affair  at  Fort  Davis,  which  he  said  ho  regarded 
as  one  of  the  most  interesting  of  liis  career.  Although  ho  was  trans- 
ferred with  the  other  sixty-five  members  of  the  company,  and  it  was 
ordered  that  at  the  end  of  his  enlistment  he  should  not  be  allowed  to  re- 
enlist, Captain  Hesse,  through  a iiersonal  appeal  to  Colonel  Lee,  and  on 
account  of  his  previous  record  for  integrity,  was  absolved  from  any 
blame  in  the  matter  and  was  given  a clear  record.  He  had  been  trans- 
ferred to  Company  A of  the  Eighth  Regiment,  and  at  the  end  of  his 
term  he  enlisted  a.gain  and  served  with  honor  in  the  civil  war.  Before 
the  end  of  the  war  he  was  transferred  to  Washington  to  take  up  work 
in  the  general  .service. 

FLED  FOR  HIS  LIFE. 

“ It  happened  on  the  night  of  St.  I’atrick’s  Day  in  1860,”  said  Cap- 
tain Hesse.  “After  tattoo  some  of  the  soldiers  went  into  a saloon, 
where,  in  the  midst  of  a quarrel,  the  barkeeper  struck  one  of  the  men 
41816—7738 


16 


on  the  neck,  causing  his  death.  The  occurrence  caused  great  excite- 
ment among  the  men,  and  the  barkeeper  fled  for  his  life.  Soon  after 
he  turned  up  at  post  headquarters  and  appealed  that  he  be  saved  from 
the  hands  of  the  mob,  which  he  said  was  pursuing  him.  He  was 
ordei'ed  placed  in  the  guardhouse  and  the  guard  was  increased. 

“ The  next  night  the  corporal  of  the  guard  took  four  of  the  men  for 
the  purpose  of  making  the  ‘ grand  rounds.’  During  the  absence  of  the 
corporal  and  the  men  the  guardhouse  was  forced  open  and  the  bar- 
keeper taken  away.  The  corporal,  returning  a half  hour  later,  insti- 
tuted a search,  with  the  result  that  the  barkeeper  was  found  hanging 
to  a tree  dead,  his  body  yet  v>^arm. 

‘*  The  alarm  was  given  immediately  to  the  officer  of  the  day,  who 
ordered  that  an  investigation  be  made  of  the  quarters  of  the  soldiers 
and  of  every  other  person  at  the  fort.  As  a result  it  was  found  that 
every  man  was  in  his  bunk,  where  all  apparently  had  been  asleep  for 
several  hours.  The  mystery  has  never  been  cleared  up,  so  far  as  I 
know,  to  this  day. 

“ However,”  continued  Captain  Hesse,  “ seven  enlisted  men  were  ar- 
rested on  suspicion  of  being  implicated  in  the  lynching,  and  were  taken 
to  El  Paso,  150  miles  distent,  in  which  town  was  located  the  nearest 
civil  court  at  that  time.  There  they  were  tried  and  acquitted. 

LEE  OKDERED  DISBANDMENT. 

” Col.  Washington  Seawell,  who  was  the  commanding  officer  of  the 
fort,  reported  the  affair  to  Colonel  Lee,  who  was  in  command  of  the 
Department  of  Texas,  with  the  result  that  an  investigation  was  made 
in  the  manner  prescribed  by  the  Army  Regulations.  The  inquiry,  al- 
though rigid,  failed  to  fasten  the  blame  on  any  person,  and  at  its  con- 
clusion Colonel  Lee  ordered  the  company  to  be  disbanded  and  the  mem- 
bers transferred  to  other  companies  to  be  discharged  at  the  end  of 
their  enlistments  without  honor — that  is,  without  the  right  to  reenlist 
in  the  Army.” 

Tlie  precedents  of  the  civil  war  cited  as  a justification  for 
the  discharge  of  the  battalion  at  Brownsville  seem  to  me,  Mr. 
President,  absolutely  inapplicable  to  this  case,  and  I quote 
likewise  from  Senate  Document  155,  page  312 ; 

Memorandum  furnished  by  The  Military  Secretary. 

Members  of  Company  A,  First  Eastern  Shore  Maryland  Volunteers, 
mustered  out  of  the  service  August  16,  1862  (presumably  honorably 
discharged),  because  they  refused  to  serve  in  Virginia. 

Members  of  Company  K,  same  regiment,  were  dishonorably  dis- 
charged, without  trial,  July  2,  1863,  for  refusing  to  leave  the  section 
of  the  State  in  which  it  wms  claimed  that  they  had  enlisted  to  serve. 

First  Regiment,  United  States  Reserve  (Missouri  Infantry),  mustered 
out  on  account  of  the  regiment  being  in  a state  bordering  on  mutiny 
on  account  of  an  alleged  misunderstanding  as  to  the  terms  of  enlist- 
ment. 

Company  C,  Fremont  Body  Guard,  discharged  on  account  of  mem- 
bers refusing  to  be  consolidated  with  any  other  organization  of  Mis- 
souri Volunteers. 

Company  G,  Tenth  New  Jersey  Infantry,  because  they  refused  to  do  . 
duty  as  infantry,  claiming  that  they  were  deceived  into  the  belief  that 
they  Avere  entering  into  the  cavalry  branch  when  enlisted. 

These  cases  would  seem  sufficient  to  establish  the  conclusion 
that  in  no  essential  particular  do  they  stand  as  a precedent  for 
the  action  we  are  now  considering  in  the  case  of  the  Twenty- 
fifth  Infantry. 

PREVIOUS  AFFRAYS. 

It  is  true,  Mr.  President,  that  previous  affrays  to  that  at 
Brownsville  have  occurred  in  the  Army,  at  posts  garrisoned  by 
both  white  and  colored  soldiers  of  the  Regular  Army,  notably, 
tlie  one  referred  to  by  the  distinguished  Senator  from  Idaho  as 
occurring  at  Fort  Sturgis,  Dak.  T.,  and,  to  again  quote  from  Sen- 
ate Document  155,  pages  328,  320,  331,  541,  and  542: 

Headquarters  Department  of  Dakota, 

Fort  iincUing,  Minn.,  November  10,  ISSo. 

Respectfully  returned  to  the  Adjutant-General  of  the  Army,  through 
the  headquarters  of  the  Division  of  the  Missouri. 

The  inclosed  letter  is,  in  the  main,  a just  and  temperate  account  of 
the  occurrences  at  Sturgis  City  and  Fort  Meade,  of  which  it  speaks. 

41816—7738 


IT 


I should  take  exception  to  but  one  of  the  statements  wliicli  Mr.  Caul- 
field makes.  He  states,  as  an  ascertained  fact,  that  “Doctor  Lynch  ” 
was  assassinated  hy  a colored  soldier.  Doubtless  he  is  fully  convinced 
of  the  truth  of  this  statement ; but  I submit  that  the  inclosed  copy  of 
a report  from  Colonel  Sturgis  of  the  testimony  given  before  the  cor- 
oner’s jury  impaneled  to  determine  the  cause  of  Doctor  Lynch’s  death, 
shows  that  while'^  a case  of  grave  suspicion  was  made  out  against 
the  soldier,  Hallon,  the  evidence  was  by  no  means  conclusive.  Of 
course  since  the  brutal  murder  of  Hallon  by  the  mob  of  Sturgis 
City  it  has  been  impracticable  to  determine  the  question  of  his  guilt 
or  innocence.  I inclose  a copy  of  the  proceedings  of  a board  of  officers 
convened  by  order  of  Colonel  Sturgis  to  inquire  into  the  facts  con- 
nected with  the  killing  of  Bell.  The  conclusions  of  the  board  confirm 
the  statements  of  INIr.  Caulfield. 

It  is  not  probable  that  all  the  persons  who  were  concerned  in  the 
murder  of  Bell  will  be  detected  and  punished.  Four  men  have  been 
arrested,  and  if  the  evidence  against  them  be  sufficient  to  establish 
their  guilt  they  will,  without  doubt,  bo  confined  and  tried.  In  their 
cases  the  machinery  of  the  law  v/ill  act  speedily. 

I do  not  recommend  the  removal  of  the  colored  troops  from  Fort 
Meade.  It  is  not  alleged  that  they,  as  a body,  have  committed  any 
crime  or  have  been  guilty  of  any  disorder.  Certain  men  belonging  to 
one  of  the  companies  are  accused  of  a most  serious  crime,  but  there 
is  nothing  to  connect  with  it  the  other  men  of  their  company  or  any 
of  the  men  of  the  other  companies.  There  is  no  evidence  to  show 
that  the  peace  of  Sturgis  City,  in  the  future,  is  threatened  by  any  of 
them.  I do  not  believe  that  it  is  seriously  threatened  by  theni. 

I have  had  much  experience  v/itii  colored  troops,  and  I have  alv/ays 
found  them  as  well  behaved  and  as  amenable  to  discipline  as  any 
white  troops  that  we  have.  The  characteristic  submissiveness  of  their 
race  is  manifested  in  the  readiness  with  which  they  yield  to  military 
control. 

They  are  much  more  temperate  than  our  white  troops,  and  crime  and 
disorders  resulting  from  intoxication  are  comparatively  rare  among 
them. 

The  situation  at  Fort  Meade  is  an  unfortunate  one.  It  is  very  un- 
desirable that  a military  post  and  a frontier  town  should  stand  in  such 
close  proximity  to  each  other  as  Sturgis  City  and  Fort  Meade  do  ; un- 
fortunate possibly  for  the  town,  uncpuestionably  unfortunate  for  the 
post.  But  the  post  was  established  before  the  town  was  founded,  and  I 
do  not  think  that  there  would  have  been  any  town  but  for  the  post. 
Still  the  evils  which  result  from  this  juxtaposition  are  not  absolutely 
unavoidable. 

The  military  authorities  at  the  post  v/ill,  I am  sure,  do  their  part  to 
prevent  the  commission  of  crime,  and  if  the  civil  authorities  of  the 
town  will  do  theirs  as  well  there  will  be  no  occasion  whatever  for  ap- 
prehension. 

I take  it  for  granted  that  in  the  Territory  of  Dakota  the  keeping  of 
houses  of  ill-fame  is  prohibited  by  law,  but  notwithstanding  the  law 
there  are  in  the  town  two  brothels  which  would  appear  to  have  been 
established  for  the  express  purpose  of  catering  to  the  taste  and  pan- 
dering to  the  passions  of  the  colored  troops,  for  they  are  “ stocked  ’’ 
with  colored  prostitutes — negresses  and  mulattoes. 

They  are,  I am  assured,  places  of  the  vilest  character,  and  it  was  at 
one  of  them  that  the  affray  of  September  19  occurred.  Had  no  such 
place  existed,  it  is  most  improbable  that  any  affray  would  have  oc- 
curred, and  if  the  people  of  Sturgis  City  suffer  such  places  to  exist 
they  must,  I submit,  expect  the  natural  result  of  their  existence — 
frequent  broils,  and  from  time  to  time  the  commission  of  the  most 
serious  crimes.  And  I submit  further  that  until  the  people  of  the  town 
shall  have  suppressed  these  dens,  which  equally  debauch  the  troops  of 
the  post  and  threaten  their  own  safety,  they  will  not  be  in  a position 
to  ask  the  Government  to  change  its  garrison. 

Aufued  H.  Terry, 
BrUjadicr-Gcncrul,  Commandinrj. 

It  is  sad  to  say  that  the  conditions  as  expressed  in  this  com- 
munication of  (xeneral  Terry  exist  too  mncli  in  connection  with 
almost  all  onr  Army  posts  and  in  their  immediate  vicinity;  and 
it  is  not  out  of  place  to  say  that  such  conditions  existed  in  the 
immediate  vicinity  of  I'ort  Brown  and  had  existed  there  for 
a great  many  years,  as  the  testimony  and  the  records  of  inves- 
tigation by  your  committee  show. 

4181G— 7738 2 


18 


Mr.  FORAKER.  Mr.  President,  will  the  Senator  allow  me  to 
interrupt  him? 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Ohio? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  I do  not  know  whether  the  Senator  calls 
attention  or  not  to  the  fact,  which  I think  ought  to  be  noted 
at  that  point  in  his  speech,  that  the  company  to  which  the 
men  belonged  who  participated  in  the  shooting  affray  upon 
which  he  is  commenting  was  not  one  of  the  three  companies 
that  were  at  Brownsville;  and,  in  the  second  place,  there  was 
no  trouble  whatever  to  ascertain  who  the  men  were  and  iden- 
tify the  men  who  were  guilty  of  participating  in  that  shooting 
affray.  Another  thing  which  should  be  noted  is  that  that  hap- 
pened twenty-five  years  ago. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  In  1885. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  And  with  one  exception,  there  is  no  man 
in  that  battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  who  was  in  the 
service  and  was  in  the  battalion  at  that  time. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  That  was  in  1885,  as  I have  stated,  and 
I am  glad  to  have  the  Senator  call  my  attention  to  the  fact, 
because  I wish  to  add  that,  in  all  the  affrays  that  have  oc- 
curred in  the  Army  and  in  connection  with  colored  troops  in  the 
Army,  this  particular  battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry 
has  never  in  the  remotest  way  been  connected  with  any  of 
them. 

I was  about  to  read  the  indorsement  of  the  War  Department. 
This  was  during  the  Administration  of  a Democratic  President 
and  a Democratic  Secretary  of  War,  Mr.  Endicott,  and  it  is 
in  reply  to  a letter  addressed  by  a citizen  of  Dakota  Terri- 
tory, who  had  applied  to  have  the  troops  removed. 

War  Department, 
'Washington,  December  1SS5. 

Sir:  In  reply  to  your  letter  of  the  27th  of  September  last  comment- 
ing upon  the  outrages  committed  at  the  town  of  Sturgis,  Dak.  Ter.,  by 
colored  soldiers  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  stationed  at  Fort  Meade, 
and  suggesting  the  removal  of  the  colored  troops  to  some  other  post 
and  the  substitution  of  white  soldiers  in  their  place,  I have  the  honor 
to  invite  attention  to  the  inclosed  copy  of  the  report  of  Gen.  A.  II. 
Terry,  commanding  the  Department  of  Dakota,  to  v/hom  the  matter  was 
referred,  and  to  say  that  both  the  Department  and  the  Lieutenant- 
General  of  the  Army  concur  in  the  views  as  expressed  therein  by 
General  Terry. 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

Wm.  C.  Endicott, 

tiecrctary  of  War. 

lion.  B.  G.  Caulfield, 

Dcadwood,  Dale.  T. 

I want  to  say  in  this  connection,  because  one  of  the  charges 
against  these  men  is  a conspiracy  of  silence,  that  there  was  no 
difficulty  at  Fort  Sturgis,  where  the  affray  to  which  I have  al- 
luded occurred,  or  at  New  Orleans,  or  where  other  affrays  oc- 
curred, in  obtaining  the  necessary  evidence  from  their  com- 
rades, colored  or  white,  when  they  believed  them  guilty  of  par- 
ticipation in  any  crime. 

Appendix  5. 

New  Orleans,  La.,  December  .},  J906. 

Sir:  About  six  years  ago  Harry  McDonald,  a white  United  States 
soldier,  of  Fort  St.  riiilip.  La.,  while  intoxicated,  followed  James  Butler, 
a white  citizen,  at  night  to  his  home  above  Fort  St.  Philip  and  tried  to 
force  Butler  to  take  him  into  his  house.  The  latter  refusing,  McDon- 
4181G— 7738 


19 


aid  shot  and  killed  him.  After  McDonald’s  return  to  the  fort,  news  of 
the  homicide  having  spread,  the  latter  was  suspected,  arrested,  and 
searched  ; his  revolver  was  carefully  examined,  its  recent  discharge  dis- 
covered, and  every  soldier,  from  the  commanding  officer  to  the  humblest 
private,  united  then  and  there  and  at  the  trial  in  ferreting  out  all  the 
evidence  in  their  power  about  this  crime.  The  accused  was  convicted 
of  murder,  and  is  now  in  the  Louisiana  Penitentiary  for  life. 

Again,  about  four  years  ago,  at  the  same  fort,  Harry  Morgan,  a pri- 
vate in  one  of  the  United  States  Artillery  companies,  was  charged  with 
killing  John  H.  McCloskey  in  a drunken  brawl  at  night  in  one  of  the 
groggeries  which  cause  so  many  similar  crimes  in  this  country.  Though 
his  fellow-soldiers,  believing  Morgan  was  not  guilty  of  this  crime,  raised 
a fund  for  his  defense,  every  soldier  and  employee  at  that  fort  volun- 
teered all  they  knew,  both  before  and  at  the  trial  on  the  witness  stand, 
about  this  case.  Morgan  was  acquitted  by  a jury  of  white  citizens  in 
Plaquemines  Parish. 

Once  since  then,  in  my  official  capacity,  I tried  and  convicted  United 
States  soldiers  of  a lesser  offense — assault  and  battery — committed 
above  Fort  Jackson,  on  the  west  bank  of  the  Mississippi  River,  and 
again  the  white  comrades  in  arms  of  the  accused  told  the  whole  story 
of  the  trouble.  Each  of  these  cases  occurred  out  of  hearing  of  the 
forts,  and  but  for  the  evidence  of  their  brother  soldiers,  either  then 
with  the  accused  or  who  subsequently  identified  them  with  the  crimes, 
there  would  have  been  a failure  of  justice. 

In  my  own  district  twenty-two  years  ago,  after  a dispute  over  race 
precedence  at  a liquor  bar  at  Dedrick  Wischusen’s  store,  in  the  parish 
of  Plaquemines,  Charles  Campbell,  a colored  man,  drew  a pistol  there 
and  shot  Theodore  Tripkovich,  a splendid  type  of  an  Austrian,  dead. 
A jury,  drawn  by  Republican  commissioners,  largely  composed  of  col- 
ored men,  to  their  eternal  credit,  sent  Campbell  to  the  scaffold  for  this 
crime,  and  he  was  hung. 

The  true  friends  of  the  colored  people  will  teach  them,  as  you  are 
doing,  that  crimes  can  ijot  be  condoned  or  concealed  by  them  without 
its  reacting  terribly  on  the  race. 

Respectfully,  James  Wiekinsox, 

District  Attorney,  Twenty-ninth  Judicial  District. 

lion.  TnEODORE  Roosevelt^ 

President  of  the  United  States. 

These  cases  are  all  of  record. 

J.  W. 

Tills  report  of  General  Terry  and  its  approval  by  Secretary 
Endicott,  indicate  the  character  of  almost  every  affray  in  the 
Army  whether  by  white  or  colored  troops,  for  both  classes  are 
included  as  disclosed  by  Army  records. 

An  effort  has  been  made  in  accord  with  all  these  preliminary 
investigations,  to  construe  the  proceedings  of  the  court  and  its 
rendered  verdict,  in  the  case  of  the  court-martial  of  Major  Pen- 
rose, commanding  at  Fort  Brown  on  the  night  of  the  affray — 
and  w’ho  was  charged  with  “ neglect  of  duty  ” — as  a verdict  ren- 
dered against  the  soldiers.  I will  ask  here  leave  to  insert  witli- 
out  reading,  the  charges  and  specifications  on  which  Major  Pen- 
rose was  both  tried  and  acquitted,  as  taken  from  the  records  of 
the  court  (see  pp.  4 and  1248)  : 

[Extracts  from  proceedings  of  a general  court-martial  convened  at 

Headquarters  Department  of  Texas,  San  Antonio,  Tex.,  February  4, 

1907,  in  the  case  of  Maj.  Charles  W.  Penrose,  Twenty-fifth  United 

States  Infantry.] 

(Page  4)  : The  accused  was  then  arraigned  upon  the  following 
charge  and  specifications  : 

“ Charge. — Neglect  of  duty,  to  the  prejudice  of  good  order  and  mili- 
tary discipline,  in  violation  of  the  sixty-second  article  of  war. 

^^Specification  I. — In  that  Maj.  Charles  W.  Penrose,  Twenty-fifth 
United  States  Infantry,  commanding  the  post  of  Fort  Drown,  Tex., 
after  being  on  the  morning  of  August  14,  190(5,  between  1 and  2 
a.  m.,  duly  informed  by  the  mayor  of  P>rownsville,  I'ex.,  one  Doctor 
Combe,  that  soldiers  of  his  command  had  shot  and  killed  one  civilian 
of  the  city  of  Brownsville,  Tex.,  and  badly  wounded  a lieutenant  of 
police  of  that  city,  did  immediately  thereafter  and  until  daylight 
wholly  fall  and  neglect  to  take  or  order  sufficient  measures  or  action 
by  prompt  inspection  of  guns  or  pistols  or  otherwise,  or  any  duo 
41816—7738 


20 


exercise  of  discipline,  to  detect  the  men  engaged  in  said  attack  and 
killing,  or  any  of  them,  or  to  restrain  or  bring  them  to  justice  for 
said  crime.  This  at  Port  Brown,  Tex.,  August  14,  1906. 

^'Specification  II. — In  that  Maj.  Charles  W.  Penrose,  Twenty-fifth 
TJnited  States  Infantry,  being  aware  of  the  feeling  of  resentment  in 
Ms  command  toward  citizens  of  Brownsville,  as  a result  of  assaults 
upon  certain  individuals  of  the  command,  and  having  been  notified 
by  a Mr.  Evans,  of  Brownsville,  about  5 p.  m.  August  13,  1906,  of 
an  attack  upon  his  wife  by  a soldier  of  the  command,  and  knowing  of 
the  inflame.d  feeling  existing  in  the  town  toward  the  soldiers  as  a 
result  thereof,  did  nevertheless  fail  to  give  any  orders  to  Capt.  E.  A. 
Maclclin,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  officer  of  the  day,  requiring  special 
vigilance  on  his  part  or  that  of  the  guard  or  to  make  frequent  inspec- 
tions or  any  inspections  during  the  night  after  12  o’clock,  and  did 
wholly  fail  and  neglect  to  take  or  order  sufficient  measures  or  pre- 
cautions to  hold  at  the  post  the  men  of  his  command,  or  in  any  manner 
to  vratch,  restrain,  or  discipline  said  men  ; by  reason  of  which  failure 
certain  men  of  his  command,  to  the  number  of  about  tv.^elve  or  more, 
were  enabled  to  assemble,  and  did  as.semble,  armed  with  rifles,  and  did 
proceed  to  the  town  of  Brownsville,  Tex.,  and  did  then  and  there 
shoot  and  wound  and  kill  certain  citizens  thereof.  This  at  Fort 
Brown  and  Brov/nsville,  Tex.,  August  13  and  14,  1906.” 

To  which  the  accused  pleaded  as  follows  : 

To  the  first  specification.  Not  guilty. 

To  the  second  specification.  Not  guilty. 

To  the  charge.  Not  guilty. 

The  jtidge-advocate  here  addressed  the  court  as  follows : 

After  a long  investigation,  covering  weeks,  the  court  vtas 
closed,  and  the  accused.  Major  Penrose,  was  acquitted  of  th<; 
charge  of  neglect  of  duty,  but  found  guilty  under  an  amended 
specification,  on  which  he  had  not  been  tried.  The  court,  how- 
ever, acquitted  him,  and  the  verdict  of  the  court  was  approved 
by  the  department  commander,  as  appears  from  the  following 
extract  from  the  record : 

Pago  124S : 

* * *.  The  court  was  closed,  and  finds  the  accused,  !Maj.  Charles 

W.  Penrose,  Twenty-fifth  United  States  Infantry— 

“ Of  the  first  specification  : ‘ Not  guilty.’ 

“ Of  the  second  specification  : ‘ Guilty,  except  the  words  ‘ being  aware 
of  the  feeling  of  resentment  in  his  command  toward  citizens  of  Browns- 
ville, as  a result  of  assaults  upon  certain  individuals  of  the  command, 
and  ; ’ and  the  word  ‘ inflamed  ; ’ and  the  words  ‘ special  vigilance  on 
his  part  or  that  of  the  guard  or  to  make  ; ’ and  the  words  ‘ and  did 
v/holly  fail  and  neglect  to  take  or  order  sufficient  measures  or  pre- 
cautions to  hold  at  the  post  the  men  of  his  command  or  in  any  manner 
to  watch,  restrain,  or  discipline  said  men,  by  reason  of  which  failure  ; ’ 
substituting  for  the  words  ‘ hy  reason  of  which  failure  ’ the  words 
‘ after  which  ; ’ and  except  the  words  ‘ to  the  number  of  twelve  or  more 
were  enabled  to  assemble  and  ; ’ and  of  tbe  excepted  words  ‘ not  guilty 
and  of  the  substituted  word  ‘ guilty.’ 

‘‘  So  that  the  second  specification,  as  amended,  shall  read  as  follows  : 

“ ‘ Specification  II : In  that  Maj.  Charles  W.  I’enrose,  Twenty-fifth 
United  States  Infantry,  having  been  notified  by  a Mr.  Evans,  of  Browns- 
ville, about  5 p.  m.  August  13,  1006,  of  an  attack  upon  his  wife  hy  a 
soldier  of  ihe  command,  and  knowing  of  the  feeling  existing  in  the 
town  toward  the  soldiers  as  a result  thereof,  did  nevertheless  fail  to 
give  any  orders  to  Capt.  E.  A.  Macklin,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  officer 
of  the  day,  requiring  frequent  inspections,  or  any  insi>ections,  during 
the  night  after  12  o’clock,  after  which  certain  men  of  his  command 
did  assemble,  armed  with  rifles,  and  did  proceed  to  the  town  of  Browns- 
ville, Tex.,  and  did  then  and  there  shoot  and  wound  and  kill  certain 
citizens  thereof.  This  at  Fort  Brown  and  Brownsville,  Tex.,  August 
13  and  14,  1906.  And  the  court  attaches  no  criminality  thereto  on 
his  part.’  ” 

” Of  the  charge  : “ ‘ Not  guilty.’  ” 

“And  the  court  does  therefore  acquit  him,  Maj.  Charles  W.  Penrose, 
Twenty-fifth  United  States  Infantry.” 

The  judge-advocate  was  then  recalled,  and  the  court,  at  7.05  p.  m. 
adjourned  sine  die, 

Of.o.  Ln  Roy  Brown, 

Colonel  Ticcnty-sixth  Infantry,  President. 

CiiA.s.  E.  IlAT,  .Tr., 

Captain,  Acting  Judge- Advocate,  Judge- Advocate. 

41816—7738 


21 


Headquarters  Department  of  Texas, 

San  Antonio,  Tex.,  March  25,  1901. 

In  the  foregoine?  case  of  Maj.  Charles  W.  Penrose,  Twenty-fifth  United 
States  Infantry,  the  proceedings,  findings,  and  acquittal  are  appro  v^ed. 

Wm.  S.  McCaskby, 

Brigadier-General,  U.  S.  Armg,  Commanding  Department. 

I submit,  Mr.  President,  that  the  soldiers  were  iieitlier  db 
rectlj"  or  indirectly  parties  to  that  trial ; that  they  were  never 
summoned  nor  appeared  before  the  court,  except  possibly  as  wit- 
nesses, either  in  person  or  by  counsel.  I am  not  familiar  with 
the  powers  or  practice  of  a court-martial ; but  it  looks  strange 
to  a lajnnan  that  an  indictment  or,  as  in  this  case,  charges  and 
specifications,  to  which  an  accused  officer  has  pleaded  and  sub- 
mitted himself  for  trial  can,  after  the  evidence  and  arguments 
are  concluded,  be  so  amended  and  changed  as  to  suit  the  whims 
of  a court  as  to  the  character  of  the  verdict  they  shall  render. 
At  all  events.  Major  Penrose  was  acquitted  of  the  charge  of 
“ neglect  of  duty,”  although  found  guilty  under  one  of  the 
amended  specifications.  If  this  finding  can  be  construed  as  im- 
plicating the  soldiers  in  this  affray — that  is,  the  acquittal  of 
Major  Penrose  and  a verdict  of  guilty  against  the  soldiers — it 
might  be  likened,  Mr.  President,  to  frontier  justice  in  the  early 
days  as  some  of  us  were  accustomed  to  hear  it,  of  the  trial  of  an 
accused  for  murder  and  the  conviction  of  his  neighbor  for  horse 
stealing. 

Mr.  FOPAKER.  Mr.  President 

q'he  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Ohio? 

Mr.  FORAKER.  I dislike  to  interrupt  the  Senator,  and  I 
will  not  do- it  if  he  has  the  slightest  objection 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I have  no  objection ; it  is  a relief  some- 
times to  be  interrupted. 

IMr.  FORAKER.  But  it  occurrrd  to  me  that  I ought  to  call 
attention  there,  for  fear  the  Senator  may  not  do  it,  to  the  fact 
that  at  the  time  when  the  Senator  from  Idaho  [Mr.  Borah] 
insisted  that  these  soldiers  had  been  court-martialed  and  found 
guilty  they  were  not  soldiers -at  all,  for  as  a result  of  their 
discharge  without  honor  they  were  not  in  the  Army  and  were 
not  subject  to  court-martial.  That  is  not  extraordinary,  though, 
measured  by  other  circumstances  and  features  of  this  most 
extraordinary  case.  Trying  a neighbor  for  horse-stealing  when 
he  was  not  charged  with  anything  is  not  a circumstance  to 
what  has  been  done  here. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Before  leaving  the  discussion  of  this  part 
of  the  case,  ISIr.  President,  I desire  to  call  to  the  attention  of  the 
Senators  that,  at  one  period,  November  18,  1906 — and  in  this  I 
shall  be  obliged  to  disagree  for  a moment  with  my  distinguished 
friend  from  Ohio  in  some  portion  of  his  remarks — in  a mo- 
ment of  inspiration  it  occurred  to  the  Secretary  of  War  that  a 
possible  injustice  had  been  done  to  these  soldiers,  that  the  pro- 
cedure which  led  up  to  the  suspending  of  the  order  dismissing 
the  soldiers  of  the  battalion  might  have  been  irregular  from  the 
standpoint  of  law,  practice,  or  i)recedent,  or  that  new  and  fur- 
ther evidence  might  be  produced.  What  I v;ant  to  call  the  at- 
tention of  Senators  to  is  the  fact  that  there  was  a time  when 
the  Secretary  of  War  seemed  to  disagree  with  the  I’resident. 

I will  read  the  order  of  November  IS,  IJKK),  when,  as  perhaps 
you  will  all  remember,  the  President  was  absent  on  a trip  to 
4181G— 7738 


22 


view  the  great  canal  being  constructed  on  the  Isthmus,  To- 
gether with  that  I will  read  another  order,  under  date  of  No- 
vember 20,  1906,  directing  the  discharge  of  the  soldiers  of  the 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry  to  continue,  Senate  Document  No.  155, 
j)ages  187  and  189 : 

[Telegram.] 

War  Department,  ’November  IS,  1906. 

The  Commanding  General,  Department  op  Texas, 

San,  Antonio,  Tex.: 

Secretary  of  War  directs  you  suspend  action  under  order  for  dis- 
charge men  of  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  until  further  orders  from  here. 
Telegraph  acknowledgment  of  this. 

Ainsworth, 

The  Military  Secretary. 


Two  days  later,  however,  for  some  cause  not  disclosed  by  the 
official  record,  he  issued  another  order,  directing  the  discharge 
to  proceed. 

[Telegram.] 


The  Military  Secretary's  Office, 

Washington,  November  20,  1906. 
Commanding  General  Department  op  Texas, 

San  Antonio: 

Secretary  War  directs  you  proceed  with  discharge  of  members  of 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry  as  originaliy  ordered.  Telegraph  acknowledg- 
ment receipt  of  this  and  subsequent  action. 

Ainsworth, 

The  Military  Secretary. 


I have  been  unable  to  obtain  from  the  records  or  from  the 


office  of  the  Adjutant-General  the  correspondence  or  telegrams 
that  passed  between  the  President  and  the  Secretary  of  War. 
Under  date  of  April  25,  1908,  I wrote  the  Adjutant-General,  and 
received  his  reply,  dated  April  27,  1908,  as  follows : 


United  States  Senate, 
Washington,  April  25,  190S. 
Maj.  Gen.  F.  C.  Ainsworth,  United  States  Army, 

Adjutant-General,  IFar  Department,  Washington,  D.  C. 

My  De.ar  General  : It  is  shown  by  the  official  documents  in  regard  to 
the  discharge  of  the  colored  soldiers  at  Brownsvilie,  as  contained  in 
Senate  Document  No.  155,  that  on  November  18,  1900,  the  Secretary 
of  War  issued  an  order  suspending  the  execution  of  the  order  for  the 
dismissal  of  these  soldiers ; that  on  the  20th  of  November,  1906,  the 
record  shows  that  the  Secretary  of  War  directed  the  immediate  execu- 
tion of  the  President’s  original  order. 

I fail  to  find  anything  in  the  official  record  relative  to  the  reasons  for 
the  suspension,  and  later  for  the  renewing  of  the  President’s  order  of 
dismissal.  Are  there  any  records,  documents,  or  otherwise  showing  that 
the  President  directed  the  carrying  out  of  the  original  order? 

I understand  that  the  President,  at  the  time  when  the  orders  of  the 
Secretary  of  War  were  issued,  was  either  on  a voyage  to  or  at  Panama. 
If  there  be  any  such  communications  addressed  to  or  received  from  the 
President,  or  other  records  relating  to  the  suspension  of  and  later  the 
renewing  of  the  President’s  order  of  dismissal  I would  respectfully  ask, 
if  you  can  properly  do  so,  that  I be  furnished  with  a copy  of  the  same. 

Yours,  truly, 

M.  G.  Bulkeley. 


War  Dep.irtment,  Adjutant-General’s  Office, 

Washington,  April  27,  190S. 

lion.  M.  G.  Bulkeley, 

United  States  Senate. 


My  Dear  Senator  : In  response  to  your  letter  of  the  25th  instant 
relative  to  the  suspension  and  subsequent  renewal  of  the  order  for  the 
dischai’ge  of  certain  colored  soldiers.  I beg  leave  to  say  that  the 
printed  record  contains  copies  of  absolutely  all  the  documents  relating 
to  the  matter  that  are  on  file  in  my  office.  Nothing  has  ever  reached 
4181G— 773S 


23 


my  office  or  come  to  my  knowledge  relative  to  the  reasons  for  the  sus- 
pension and  subsequent  renewal  of  the  order  for  the  discharge  of  these 
men. 

Very  respectfully,  F.  C.  Ainsworth, 

Adjutant-General. 

I am  therefore  compelled  to  rely  upon  the  press  reports  oi 
that  period  for  the  information  which  I have  sought  from  the 
official  records  of  the  War  Department.  Of  course  I can  not 
vouch  entirely  for  their  accuracy,  hut  I find  no  record  any- 
where of  the  denial  of  their  truthfulness.  I ask  that  the  article 
from  the  Washington  Post  of  November  21,  190G,  from  which 
I quote,  may  be  printed  in  full  as  a part  of  my  remarks.  It  is 
the  best  record  I can  obtain  of  the  reason  for  the  suspension  of 
the  order  of  the  President  and  its  renewal. 

]Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Is  the  article  wdiich  the  Senator  is 
about  to  read  from  the  Washington  Post  coincident  with  the 
order  of  the  Secretary  of  War  suspending  proceedings  against 
these  soldiers? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I will  give  the  dates.  The  date  of  the  sus- 
pension order  is  November  18 ; the  date  of  its  renewal  Novem- 
ber 20;  and  the  article  I quote  is  dated  November  21,  appar- 
ently written  in  view  of  all  the  circumstances  which  had  tran- 
spired and  which  were  transpiring  during  these  two  or  three 
days. 

[The  Washington  Post,  November  21,  1006.] 

TAFT'S  BOLD  STEP. 

♦ * ***!(!  * 

Is  there  danger  that  the  suspension  by  Secretary  Taft  of  the 
President’s  order  dismissing  the  three  colored  companies  of  the 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  without  honor,  will  cause  friction  between  the 
President  and  the  man  who  has  been  his  chief  lieutenant  the  past  two 
years  ? 

This  is  the  question  public  men  and  Army  officers  are  asking  each 
other  when  they  discuss  this  situation  privately. 

The  situation  is  an  embarrassing  one  for  the  President,  whichever 
horn  of  the  dilemma  he  may  take.  After  reviev/ing  the  facts  in  this 
case,  as  submitted  to  him,  the  President  issued  the  now  famous  order 
that  put  a whole  battalion  of  men  out  of  the  service  dishonorably,  and 
then  started  for  the  Isthmus.  Some  comment  has  resulted  because  the 
order  was  not  promulgated  until  after  the  election.  The  action  of  the 
President  was  supposed  to  be  final,  and  if  criticism  followed  it  might 
be  reasonably  supposed  that  the  incident  in  large  measure  would  be 
forgotten  before  the  President  again  reached  Washington. 

TAFT  ASSUMES  RESPONSIBILITY. 

If  this  was  the  expectation.  Secretary  Taft  succeeded  admirably  in 
reviving  public  interest  and  intensifying  the  criticism  of  the  President’s 
original  order.  Of  course,  the  President  could  not  be  expected  to  know 
of  the  deluge  of  complaints  and  protests  with  which  the  Department 
was  flooded  after  his  departure,  nor  did  he  know  that  the  New  York 
Republican  Club  had  condemned  his  action  and  called  for  fair  play  for 
these  colored  troops. 

Secretary  Taft  did  know  these  things,  however,  and  he  assumed 
the  responsibility  of  suspending  the  Executive  order  until  the  Presi- 
dent could  be  heard  from.  Now,  with  the  matter  afresh  in  the  public 
mind,  the  President  must  add  to  the  weight  of  these  protests  by  com- 
pelling submission  to  his  original  order,  if  he  overrides  the  Secretary, 
or  admit  that  he  may  have  acted  hastily  if  he  rescinds  his  order  and 
reopens  the  case.  Which  he  will  do  may  be  known  to-day,  by  which 
time  Secretary  Taft  hopes  to  be  in  communication  with  the  President. 

Meanwhile  the  War  Secretary  will  say  nothing.  He  refused  yestei’- 
day  to  say  more  than  “ I can’t  discuss  the  case  until  to-morrow.” 
This  was  interpreted  to  mean  that  the  Secretary  could  say  nothing 
until  he  had  heard  from  the  I’resident  and  received  his  instructions. 
The  Secretary  also  declined  to  say  whether  he  had  been  in  communica- 
tion with  the  I’resident  by  wireless. 

4181G— 7738 


24 


COXFEKS  WITH  OLIVER, 

Secretary  Taft  arrived  in  Washino'ton  from  New  York  yesterday 
r.ftei-noon  and  went  at  once  to  his  office,  where  he  summoned  General 
Oliver,  Assistant  Secretary  of  War ; Major-General  Ainsworth,  Mili- 
tary Secretary,  and  Brig.  Gen.  Thomas  II.  Barry,  Chief  of  Staff,  for 
a conference.  This  conference  lasted  more  than  an  hour,  and  before 
it  was  concluded  Mr.  Loeb,  Secretary  to  the  President,  also  was  sum- 
moned to  the  Department.  Mr.  Loeb  was  called  into  the  conference 
presumably  to  give  some  information  concerning  the  time  when  the 
President  was  expected  to  reach  Porto  Rico  and  the  possibility  of 
getting  access  to  him  over  the  cable,  a much  more  satisfactory  method 
of  communication  than  by  v/ireless. 

It  was  suggested  yesterday  after  the  conference  that  Secretary  Taft's 
reason  for  refusing  to  talk  vras  his  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  the 
President  would  not  rescind  his  order,  and  that  it  had  been  decided 
not  to  make  this  decision  public  until  it  was  possible  to  accompany 
it  with  copies  of  the  reports  of  Colonel  Bixby  and  General  Garlington, 
These  reports  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the  Public  Printer  for  several 
days,  and  it  is  expected  that  they  will  be  ready  for  distribution  to-day. 

It  is  hoped  by  officials  of  the  War  Department  that  their  publica- 
tion will  set  at  rest  the  agitation  which  the  President’s  order  has 
aroused,  as  they  are  regarded  by  the  officials  as  showing  clearly  the 
necessity  for  the  dismissal  of  the  negro  soldiers,  and  that  the  action 
taken  by  the  President  was  the  only  thing  that  could  be  done  under 
the  circumstances. 

This  surmise,  on  the  other  hand,  is  discounted  by  the  positive  state* 
ment  from  a reliable  source  that  officials  here  have  not  been  in  com- 
munication with  the  President  since  he  left  Colon,  and  that  nothing 
has  been  heard  from  him  on  the  subject  of  the  dismissal  of  the  troops. 

DISPATCH  FROM  PRESIDENT, 

A message  from  the  President,  however,  had  reached  Gilchrist 
Stewart,  of  the  Constitutional  League,  in  New  York  City,  in  which  the 
President  declined  to  suspend  his  order  discharging  the  colored  troops 
unless  the  facts  as  known  to  him  were  shown  to  be  false,  but  express- 
ing his  willingness  to  hear  new  facts  bearing  on  that  case. 

Mr.  Stewart  cabled  to  President  Roosevelt  at  Ancon,  Panama,  as 
follows  : 

“ Republican  county  committee  unanimously  denounces  discharge  of 
colored  soldiers.  Parsons,  Olcott,  Bennet,  committee  petitioning  De- 
partment. Newspapers  emphatic.  Developments  and  new  facts  war- 
rant. Ask  immediate  suspension  order.” 

The  President's  reply  contained  the  following  : 

“ Unless  facts  as  known  to  me  are  shown  to  be  false,  the  order  will 
under  no  circumstances  be  revoked,  and  I shall  not  for  one  moment 
consider  suspending  it  on  a simple  allegation  that  there  are  new  facts 
until  these  new  facts  are  laid  before  me.  Inform  any  persons  having 
new  facts  to  have  them  in  shape  to  lay  before  me  at  once  on  my  re- 
turn. and  I will  then  consider  whether  or  not  any  further  action  by  me 
is  called  for. 

“ Theodore  Roosevelt.-*^ 

NO  WIRELESS  COMMUNICATION. 

At  the  Department  yesterday,  it  was  explained  that  the  reason  the 
President  was  able  to  reply  to  Mr.  Stewart’s  cablegram,  was  that  Mr. 
Stev, art’s  inquiry  was  sent  early  Saturday  and  reached  Colon  before  the 
cable  office  closed,  while  Secretary  Taft’s  message  was  not  sent  until 
Saturday  night,  and  doubtless  m.issed  the  President.  Since  the  Louisi- 
ana left  Colon,  both  Secretary  Taft  and  Secretary  Loeb  have  been  out 
of  communication  with  the  President,  although  repeated  efforts  have 
been  made  to  pick  up  the  ship  by  wireless.  A message  from  the  Presi- 
dent, given  out  at  the  White  House  Monday,  evidently  was  sent  by 
regular  telegraph  from  Colon  and  not  by  wireless  from  the  Louisiana. 

Pains  were  taken  to  show  that  Secretary  Taft  had  not  attempted  to 
go  over  the  head  of  the  President  in  his  absence,  but  had  merely  di- 
rected that  the  execution  of  the  order  be  suspended.  He  has  acqui- 
esced in  the  delay  in  putting  it  into  operation  in  order  to  afford  the 
President  an  opportunity  to  reconsider  if  he  wishes  to  do  so. 

Some  Army  officers  contend  that  if  the  President  had  knowledge 
of  the  sentiment  which  his  action  has  created  and  the  criticism  which 
it  has  caused,  he  might  reopen  the  case  and  give  the  men  affected  an 
opportunity  to  defend  themselves.  Being  out  of  the  country,  he  has 
not  had  an  opportunity  to  know  how  a large  portion  of  the  public 
regards  the  drastic  course  he  took.  Officials  of  the  War  Department 
contend,  however,  that  the  public  will  be  thoroughly  enlightened  and 
approve  the  course  of  the  I’resident  as  soon  as  the  report  of  General 
Garlington  is  published. 

4181G— 7738 


25 


The  War  Department  had  no  advices  yesterday  confirming  the  press 
dispatches  from  Fort  Reno  that  twenty-five  members  of  the  Twenty- 
fifth  Infantry  already  have  been  discharged  under  the  original  order. 
So  far  as  the  Department  knows,  it  was  said,  only  seven  members  of 
the  battalion  alleged  to  be  responsible  for  the  riot  at  Brownsville  have 
been  dismissed,  and  these  were  soldiers  who  w'ere  arrested  at  San 
Antonio  and  were  dismissed  from  the  service  after  the  courts  failed 
to  substantiate  charges  that  the  men  participated  in  the  riot  at  Browns- 
ville. 

At  this  point  I will  end  the  discussion  of  that  phase  of  the 
question,  as  to  the  propriety  and  the  legality  and  the  prece- 
dents for  the  dismissal  of  these  troops,  and  I will  talk  for  a few 
moments  of  Brownsville,  its  characteristics,  and  the  surround- 
ing country,  and  I shall  quote  during  these  remarks  from  no 
less  authority  than  Texas  citizens  themselves  and  those  who 
live  in  and  are  familiar,  and  have  been  for  years,  Avith  that 
part  of  the  country. 

BKOWXSVILLE  AND  ITS  CIIAEACTEIUSTICS. 


Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  is  a military  post  established  during  the 
Mexican  v/ar,  1840,  and  is  contiguous  to  the  city  of  Browns- 
ville, near  the  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande  River ; it  had  a popu- 
lation in  1900  of  0,305,  as  given  by  the  Bureau  of  the  Census, 
whose  authority  I append : 


Depap.tment  op  Commerce  and  Labor, 

Bureau  op  tub  Census, 
Washington,  April  i},  190S. 

lion.  Morgan  G.  Bulkeley, 

United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  G. 


Dear  Senator  Bulkeley  ; In  response  to  your  telephonic  request  of 
to-day,  I take  pleasure  in  giving  you  below,  the  data  specified  in  regard 
to  Brownsville,  Tex.,  with  the  exception  of  the  number  of  naturalized 
citizens,  which  was  not  tabulated  at  the  Tv/elfth  Census  for  cities  with 
less  than  25,000  inhabitants  : 


Population,  1000. 


Total,  white,  G,287  ; negro,  18 G,  305 

Male 2,  831 

Female 3,  474 

Native  born 3,  843 

Male 1,  755 

Female 2,  088 

Foreign  born 2,  4G2 

Male 1,  070 

Female 1,  38G 

Males  21  years  of  age  and  over 1,  324 

Native  white 500 

Foreign  white 810 

Negro 5 


Very  respectfully, 


W.  S.  Rossiter,  Aeting  Director. 


It  is,  and  alvrays  has  been,  necessarily  a frontier  post;  it  is 
separated  from  the  business  and  residential  portion  of  the  city 
by  a road,  knoAvn  as  the  Garrison  road,  and  oftentimes  called 
Fifteenth  street;  and  it  is  in  close  proximity  to  this  residential 
part  that  the  affray  occurred  on  the  night  of  August  13-14,  1906. 
This  post  has  been  garrisoned  since  its  establishment  by  both 
white  and  colored  soldiers,  commanded  by  distinguished  and 
well-known  officers  of  the  Army,  to  the  entire  satisfaction  of 
the  citizens  of  Brownsville  and  without  serious  discrimination 
against  the  soldier,  except  that  we  find  in  the  evidence  that  the 
police  were  more  aggressive  against  the  soldier  for  slight  of- 
fenses, for  the  reason  that  the  soldiers’  lines,  if  inflicted,  wore 
always  paid  in  cash.  The  Mexicans,  if  lined,  were  sent  to  the 
county  jail  or  the  workhouse. 

4181G— 7738 


2G 


Mr.  HOPKINS.  To  work  out  tlie  fine? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  To  ^York  out  tlie  fine.  Tliis  is  the  testi- 
mony of  Captain  Kelly.  He  was  a soldier  of  the  civil  war,  in 
the  Union  army ; settled  at  Browmsville  at  the  close  of  the  war, 
forty  years  ago  and  more ; and  is  one  of  its  most  prominent  and 
reputable  citizens.  He  is  jmesident  of  a bank,  and  was  the  pre- 
siding officer  of  the  investigating  committee  of  the  citizens  of 
Brownsville  immediately  after  this  affray. 

[Testimony  of  Captain  Kelly,  vol.  3,  p.  2528.] 

Q.  Now,  Captain,  I will  get  you  to  state,  during  the  entire  time  the 
Twenty-sixth  was  there,  did  you  hear  any  complaints  from  the  officers 
of  any  oppressive  treatment  whatever  by  the  policemen  of  Browns- 
ville against  the  soldiers? — A.  I never  heard  an  officer  say  so  Jit  all.  I 
know  there  were  two  or  three  conflicts  between  drunken  soldiers  and 
Mexican  policemen,  and  I have  no  doubt  that  the  Mexican  policemen 
when  they  got  a man  who  was  drunk  did  not  treat  him  well. 

Q.  Whether  he  was  a soldier  or  not? — A.  Well,  particularly  if  he 
were  a soldier. 

Q.  Did  not  treat  him  well? — A.  That  is  to  say,  I think  they  would 
strike  a soldier  harder  and  get  him  to  the  police  station  as  fast  as  they 
could,  for  two  reasons  : First,  w'hen  he  was  fined,  he  ahvays  managed 
to  pay  his  fine.  His  comrades  made  it  up.  That  appeared  to  be  one 
of  the  reasons  why  they  were  very  likely  and  very  anxious  to  run  a 
soldier  in  when  they  got  a chance.  I suppose  there  was  some  sort  of 
divvy  about  the  fines.  I do  not  know  that  of  my  own  knowledge.  If 
they  ran  a Mexican  in,  he  was  simply  sent  to  labor  on  the  streets. 

Q.  He  had  no  money  to  pay  his  fine? — A.  No  money  to  pay  his  fine. 

By  Senator  Foraker  : 

Q.  What  was  the  other  reason? 

Senator  Warner.  He  said  one  reason  was  that  a soldier  would  pay 
his  fine,  and  the  other  was  that  a Mexican  did  not. 

These  peaceful  conditions  seem  to  have  been  maintained  in 
Brownsville,  as  between  the  citizens  and  the  soldiers,  up  to  the 
time  of  the  order  for  the  battalion  of  the  Tw^enty-fifth  Infantry 
to  occupy  the  post. 

The  maintenance  of  this  post,  for  the  protection  of  the  city 
of  Brownsville  and  its  people,  both  from  foreign  invasion  and 
from  the  lawless  inhabitants  in  the  surrounding  territory,  was 
insisted  upon  w’hen  the  question  of  its  abandonment  was  being 
considered  by  a board  of  Army  officers  in  1901 ; I will  quote  the 
strong  and  urgent  reasons  urged  by  officials  and  civilians  alike 
for  the  retention  of  this  and  other  posts  on  the  Rio  Grande 
frontier ; 

[Extracts  from  the  location  and  distribution  of  military  posts.  House 

Doc.  No.  618,  Fifty-seventh  Congress,  first  session,  pp.  380  to  389,  in- 
clusive.] 

7.  FORT  BROWN,  TEX. 

* * ¥ * * * x: 

[Telegram.] 

Dallas,  Tex.,  October  2,  1901. 

Secretary  of  War,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

It  is  rumored  that  the  Department  contemplates  abandoning  Fort 
Brown,  in  this  State.  The  importance  of  this  post  to  effect  the  pro- 
tection of  the  people  of  the  lower  Rio  Grande  frontier  can  not  be 
overestimated,  and  I earnestly  ask  that  the  fort  be  maintained. 

C.  A.  Culberson. 

War  Department, 

A D.T  U T A NT-  G E N E R Ali^  S O F F I C E, 

Washington,  D.  C.,  October  10,  1901. 
Hon  Charles  A.  Culberson,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Dallas,  Tex. 

Sir  : The  Secretary  of  War  directs  me  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of 
your  telegi-am  of  the  2d  instant,  in  which  you  remark  that  it  is  rumored 
that  the  abandonment  of  Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  is  contemplated,  and  stat- 
41816—7738 


27 


ing  that  the  importance  of  this  post  for  the  protection  of  the  people 
of  the  lower  Rio  Grande  frontier  can  not  he  overestimated,  and  asking 
that  the  fort  he  maintained  ; and  replying  thereto  to  inform  you  that 
your  request  will  receive  due  consideration. 

Very  respectfully, 

n.  C.  CoRBi>r, 

Adjutant-General,  Major-General,  United  States  Army. 


Dallas,  Tex,  October  f,  1901. 
The  Secretary  op  War,  Washington,  D.  G. 

Sib  : I have  just  learned  v/ith  astonishment  that  the  War  Depart- 
ment is  contemplating  the  abandonment  of  Fort  Brown,  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Rio  Grande,  on  the  Mexican  frontier  of  Texas.  I do  not  under- 
stand how  such  a step  could  meet  with  a moment’s  favorable  consid- 
eration by  any  one  familiar  with  the  siuation  and  necessities  of  tha^ 
frontier,  for  there  is  no  more  important  post  in  all  the  military  estab- 
lishment of  the  country  from  a strategic  point  of  view.  It  is  at  the 
mouth  of  the  principal  river  of  our  western  border,  commanding  1,700 
miles  of  exposed  frontier  liable  at  any  time  to  require  prompt  and  ef- 
fective military  aid.  The  recent  development  of  railroad  facilities  has 
rendered  its  support  comparatively  cheap,  and  there  is  every  reason 
why  it  should  be  retained  and  strengthened  instead  of  being  abandoned. 
The  importance  of  that  post  was  demonstrated  in  the  civil  war  of  1861-^ 
1865,  and  its  great  utility  for  international  defense  is  appreciated  to 
the  fullest  by  Mexico,  as  that  Government  maintains  its  chief  garrison 
just  across  the  river  at  Matamoros.  I v>rish  to  protest  most  vigorously 
against  the  discontinuance  of  Fort  Brown  as  wholly  unwarranted  and 
in  the  nature  of  a public  calamity  to  the  people  of  Texas,  if  not  of  the 
entire  Union. 

In  speaking  thus  emphatically,  I do  not  do  so  from  hearsay,  for  I am 
entirely  familiar  with  the  situation  there,  as  I have  traversed  the  region 
along  the  Rio  Grande  and  at  its  mouth,  in  the  vicinity  of  Brownsville 
many  times,  and  am  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  conditions  and  pos- 
sibilities of  that  frontier. 

The  details  and  facts  connected  with  the  post  will  be  presented  to 
you  by  others  more  directly  interested  locally,  but  in  the  name  of  the 
people  of  the  whole  State  I desire  to  enter  my  most  earnest  objection 
and  protest  to  the  proposed  action  of  the  Denartment  in  abandoning 
this  critical  and  important  military  establishment.  “ 

I have  the  honor  to  be,  with  great  respect, 

Your  obedient  servant. 


Dudley  G.  Wooten. 


non.  Elihu  Root, 

Secretary  of  War,  Washington,  D 


Senate  Chamber^ 
Austin,  Tex.,  October  3,  1901. 

. G. 


Sir  : I have  the  honor  to  herewith  transmit  you  copy  of  senate  con- 
current resolution  No.  8,  passed  by  the  senate  and  house  of  renresento- 
tives  of  the  State  of  Texas  October  1,  1901. 

With  continued  high  regards,  I have  the  honor  to  remain,  sir. 

Yours,  obediently. 


W.  B.  O'Qdinn, 

Secretary  Senate,  State  of  Texas. 

It  was  thought  of  enough  importance  for  the  legislature  of 
the  State  of  Texas  to  pass  a series  of  resolutions  of  the  same 
character,  which  I will  ask  to  have  included  as  a part  of  my 
remarks. 


Senate  concurrent  resolution  8. 

Whereas  it  has  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Texas  legislature  that 
the  Federal  Government  contemplates  the  early  abandonment  of  Fort 
Brown,  located  in  the  town  of  Brownsville,  Tex.  ; and 

Whereas  the  abandonment  of  said  fort  would  mean  the  removal  of 
one  of  the  most  important  Federal  posts  on  the  Mexican  frontier,  it 
being  at  the  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande,  and  guarding  the  frontier  for 
more  than  140  miles  ; and 

^ Whereas  the  town  of  Brownsville  and  the  town  of  Matamoros  are 
important  to  the  commercial  world,  and  especially  the  town  of  Browns- 
ville, which  receives  a goodly  amount  of  ocean  traffic  ; and 

Whereas  the  Mexican  Government  considers  the  town  of  Matamoros 
and  country  tributary  thereto  as  of  sufficient  commercial,  military  stra- 
tegic importance  to  justify  said  government  in  maintaining  at  the  said 
town  of  Matamoros  a strong  military  post ; Therefore  be  it 
41816 — 7738 


28 


liesolved  hy  the  senate  of  the  State  of  Texas  (the  house  of  repre- 
sentatives concurring) , That  we  do  hereby  protest  against  the  contem- 
plated action  of  the  Federal  Government,  and  most  earnestly  request  of 
the  l*resident  of  the  United  States  and  the  Secretary  of  War  to  con- 
tinue said  post  and  all  other  military  posts  on  the  Rio  Grande. 

Be  it  further  resolved.  That  our  Senators  and  Representatives  in 
Congress  and  the  governor  of  this  State  be,  and  they  are  hereby,  re- 
quested to  take  up  this  matter  with  the  proper  officials  of  the  Federal 
Government  and  urge  the  continuation  of  the  military  post  at  Fort 
Brown  : and 

Resolved  further.  That  the  secretary  of  the  senate  be,  and  he  is 
hereby,  instructed  to  immediately  mail,  a copy  of  this  resolution  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  the  Secretary  of  War,  each  of  our  Sena- 
tors and  Representatives  in  Congress,  and  to  the  governor  of  this  State. 

The  State  op  Texas,  Senate  Chamber. 

I,  W.  B.  O’Quinn,  secretary  of  the  senate  of  the  State  of  Texas,  do 
hereby  certify  that  the  forgoing  is  a true  and  correct  copy  of  senate 
concurrent  resolution  No.  8,  as  passed  by  the  senate  and  house  of 
representatives  on  October  1,  1901. 

W.  B.  O’Quinn, 
Secretary  of  the  Senate. 


I will  also  quote  from  a letter  written  by  the  governor  of 
Texas : 


Executive  Office, 
Austin,  Tex.,  Octohcr  J/,  1901. 


Sir  : I beg  to  herewith  inclose  you  a copy  of  a resolution  adopted 
by  the  legislature  of  Texas  in  reference  to  the  contemplated  abandon- 
ment of  Fort  Brown,  and  to  earnestly  request  that  the  post  be  main- 
tained. It  is  quite  important  that  troops  be  held  at  the  mouth  of 
the  Rio  Grande  River,  in  order  to  insure  peace  and  order  on  that 
portion  of  our  frontier.  In  my  judgment,  its  location  is  such  as 
makes  it  of  exceeding  importance,  and  I earnestly  trust  that  the 
Department  >vill  retain  it  at  its  present  strength. 

I have  the  honor  to  be,  yours,  very  respectfully, 

Joseph  D.  Sayers, 

Governor  of  Texas. 

The  Secretary  op  War, 

Washington,  D,  C. 


House  op  Representatives,  United  States, 

Beaumont,  Tex.,  Novemher  20,  1001. 

Hon.  Secretary  of  War, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

Dear  Sir  ; A resolution  of  the  Texas  legislature  protesting  against 
the  abandonment  of  Fort  Brown,  near  Brownsville,  Tex.,  has  been  for- 
vmrded  to  you.  I beg  hereby  to  join  in  this  protest,  and  respectfully 
request  that  this  fort  be  continued. 

Very  respectfully,  S.  B.  Cooper, 

Memher  Congress,  Texas. 


Huntsville,  Tex.,  Octoher  5,  1901. 

The  Secretary  of  War. 

Washington,  D.  C. 

Dear  Sir  : Our  people  are  very  much  stirred  up  over  the  prospective 
abandonment  of  Fort  Brown  as  a military  post. 

Permit  me  to  earnestly  urge  upon  you  the  propriety  of  continuing 
the  protection  of  the  Rio  Grande  section  by  maintaining  this  fort. 

Very  truly,  yours, 

Thos.  II.  Ball,  M.  C. 


Sherman,  Tex.,  Octoher  h 1901. 

Hon.  Elihu  Root, 

Secretary  of  Ifa?',  Washington,  D.  C. 

Sir  : It  has  been  called  to  my  attention  that  the  War  Department  has 
been  contemplating  the  abandonment  of  Fort  Brown,  at  Brownsville, 
Tex. 

As  one  of  the  Representatives  from  Texas,  feeling  a deep  interest  in 
the  welfare  of  her  people,  and  being  well  aware  of  the  exposure  and 
difficulties  our  people  on  the  Mexican  border  have  been  subjected  to,  I 
most  earnestly  urge  the  increase  of  the  frontier  protection,  the  continu- 
ance of  Fort  Brown,  and  the  location  of  adequate  military  forces  along 
the  Rio  Grande  border  to  insure  protection  of  American  interests.  I 
41816—7738 


29 


would  respectfully  suggest  that  the  maintenance  of  forts  and  military 
garrisons  along  the  Rio  Grande  would  not  be  attended  with  any  ex- 
traordinary expense,  and  that  no  part  of  the  frontier  of  the  United 
States  is  more  in  need  of  a constant,  watchful  guard  than  that  bordering 
on  the  Republic  of  Mexico.  I trust  that  a consideration  of  this  matter 
will  result  in  an  increase,  and  not  in  a decrease  of  this  protection. 
Although  located  myself  in  the  northern  part  of  Texas,  I feel  that  the 
interests  of  the  southwestern  portion  of  the  State,  which  is  developing 
so  rapidly,  should  not  be  discouraged,  nor  should  American  interests  be 
allowed  to  suffer  for  want  of  adequate  protection. 

Very  respectfully, 

' C.  B.  Randell,  M.  C.. 

Fifth  District  of  Texas. 


Gonzales,-  Octoher  7,  1901. 

Hon.  Eliiiu  Root, 

Secretary  of  War,  Washington,  D.  C. 

My  Dear  Sir  : My  information  is  that  your  Department  contem- 
plates the  abandonment  of  Fort  Brown,  at  Browmsville,  Tex.,  and  I 
write  you  to  earnestly  protest  against  this  action.  I trust  you  will 
pardon  me  for  saying  that,  in  my  judgment,  a throrough  investigation 
will  convince  you  that  such  action  will  be  both  unwdse  and  unjust. 
It  is  true  that  now  our  relations  v/ith  Mexico  are  extremely  friendly, 
on  account  of  w'hich  wm  all  rejoice  ; still,  the  situation  is  such  that  the 
maintenance  of  the  fort  will  be  an  aid  to  continued  security,  and  pre- 
vent any  uprising  of  lawlessness  along  the  border,  which  is  so  far  from 
the  seat  of  government  of  both  countries. 

From  letters  and  telegrams  I have  received,  it  is  evident  that  the 
people  of  the  State  in  that  section  are  much  stirred  up,  and  great  dis- 
satisfaction w’iil  result  from  the  abandonment  of  the  fort. 

Doubtless  my  colleague,  the  Hon.  Rud.  Kleberg,  wdio  is  now  in  Wash- 
ington, v.^ill  interview  you  in  the  matter.  I heartily  join  him  in  his 
efforts  in  this  matter. 

Very  respectfully,  yours.  Geo.  F.  Burgess. 


House  of  Representatives,  United  States, 

Washington,  D.  C.,  October  26,  1901. 

The  Secretary  op  War. 

War  Department,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Sir  : I beg  to  submit  for  your  consideration  the  telegram  I received 
some  time  ago,  during  your  absence  from  the  city,  with  reference  to 
Fort  Brown,  at  Brownsville,  Tex.,  of  wdiicli  I spoke  to  you  to-day. 
The  gentlemen  signing  the  message  are  all  prominent  citizens,  and  their 
statements  are  perfectly  reliable.  I trust  that  Fort  Brov/n  and  the 
posts  along  tise  Rio  Grande  generally  may  be  maintained,  as  I believe 
they  are  necessary  both  as  strategic  points  as  wmli  as  necessary  pro- 
tection against  marauding  bands  on  the  border  between  the  United 
States  and  the  Republic  of  Mexico. 

Very  respectfully,  Rudolph  Kleberg, 

Member  of  Congress. 

I have  quoted  all  these  letters,  or  portions  of  them,  not  to 
show  the  character  of  the  population  of  Brownsville  but  to  show 
the  character  of  tlie  population  that  lives  in  the  surrounding 
territory  on  both  banks  of  the  Rio  Grande,  both  in  Mexico 
and  in  the  United  States,  and  the  opinion  of  the  people  of 
Texas  themselves  as  to  the  necessity  not  only  of  protection  from 
across  the  river,  but  from  the  lawless  people  who  occupy  this 
territory. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  IMr.  President,  if  it  will  not  in- 
terrupt the  Senator  from  Connecticut,  I should  like  to  ask  him 
a question. 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER  (Mr.  Scott  in  the  chair).  Does 
the  Senator  from  Connecticut  yield  to  the  Senator  from  Michi- 

gcan? 

Mr.  BTJLKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  I should  like  to  know  whether  it 
developed  in  the  course  of  the  hearing  that  the  Mexicans  came 
freely  to  Brownsville,  the  Mexican  soldiers  mingling  with  the 
American  soldiers.  Did  that  develop  in  the  hearing V 
4181G— 7738 


Mr.  BULKELEY.  There  is  abundant  testimony  as  to  that. 
There  was  a ferry  running  in  close  proximity  to  Fort  Brown, 
and  it  was  a constant  matter  of  visit  from  one  place  to  the 
other  by  the  soldiers. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Did  it  develop  at  all  that  the  Mexi- 
cans came  over  at  any  time  and  rioted  in  the  city  of  Browns- 
ville? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  If  the  Senator  will  listen  to  the  letter 
which  I am  going  to  read,  I think  he  will  be  convinced  that  at 
one  time  the  city  of  Brownsville  had  been  in  the  hands  of  the 
lawless  people  who  inhabit  this  territory  for  two  or  three  days 
at  a time,  when  it  was  almost  impossible  to  secure,  help,  and 
they  even  had  to  call  on  the  Mexican  Government  to  protect 
Brownsville. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  I noticed  in  your  statement  a mo- 
ment ago  that  the  governor  of  Texas  and  other  public  men 
felt  that  this  garrison  should  be  strengthened.  Of  course  that 
was  not  from  fear  of  war,  but  probably  from  fear  of  rioting. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  It  was  merely  for  the  protection  of  the 
people  against  raids  from  the  other  side  and  their  own  side  of 
the  river.  I think  the  next  letter  will  disclose  the  point. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  “ Marauding  bands  ” is  the  expression. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  “Marauding  bands?” 

Mr.  FORAKER.  That  is  the  expression  employed  by  one  of 
the  petitioners  for  the  post  to  be  continued — in  order  to  pro- 
tect the  citizens  of  Brownsville  against  the  marauding  bands. 

Mr.  PILES.  I should  like  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Connecti- 
cut what  is  the  color  of  the  uniform  of  the  Mexican  soldiers. 

]\Ir.  BULKELEY.  I do  not  think  it  is  in  the  testimony,  and 
I do  not  know  that  I can  give  it.  But  I shall  not  make  any 
charge  against  the  Mexican  soldiers  as  marauders  in  this  town. 
I have  another  theory  which  I will  develop  later.  I do  not 
think  there  is  any  occasion  to  lay  this  raid  to  Mexican  soldiers. 

Mr.  HOPKINS.  It  is  not  material  from  your  standpoint. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I do  not  think  there  is  any  charge  on  the 
part  of  anybody  against  them,  whatever  their  uniforms  were. 
Some  questions  have  been  raised  in  regard  to  the  character  of 
the  guns  they  used,  and  whether  it  was  possible  that  the  ammu- 
nition used  in  United  States  arms  could  be  used  in  IMexican 
guns.  But  I do  not  recollect  that  any  question  was  raised. 

Mr.  FORAKER  rose. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Possibly  the  Senator  from  Ohio  can  state. 

Mr,  FORAKER.  My  recollection  is  there  is  some  testimony 
on  that  point;  that  the  uniform  of  the  Mexican  soldiers  is 
somewhat  like  ours,  though  not  exactly  the  same  shade  of  light 
color.  There  is  a difference  of  shade.  That  is  my  recollection 
as  to  what  the  testimony  is.  As  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
proceeds,  I will  try  to  find  out. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  The  letter  I am  about  to  read 

Mr.  FORAKER.  I want  to  joint  with  the  Senator  in  this 
connection  in  saying  that  no  one  means  to  suggest  that  this 
was  done  by  Mexican  soldiers.  All  I understand  that  the  Sena- 
tor is  undertaking  to  do  here  is  to  show  bj'^  these  statements 
from  Texas  citizens  as  to  why  a garrison  should  be  continued 
at  Brownsville,  that  the  people  at  that  point  needed  the  pro- 
tection of  a garrison  as  against  the  marauding  bands  which  in- 
41S1G — 7738 


fested  that  locality.  That  was  their  own  expression.  That  is 
the  reason  w^hy  I used  it. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I am  about  to  read  a letter  from  a mem- 
ber of  the  Texas  legislature,  written  at  that  time.  The  question 
which  was  being  considered  by  a board  of  Army  officers  was 
the  abandonment  of  undesirable  and  unnecessary  Army  posts, 
and  Fort  Brown  was  among  the  number.  They  were  not  con- 
fined to  the  frontier.  They  were  ail  under  consideration.  It 
v/as  a lengthy  hearing.  This  [exhibiting]  is  only  one  volume  of 
the  report,  and  these  letters  that  I am  quoting  from  are  all  con- 
tained in' this  volume. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  It  was  in  1901. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  1901.  I will  read  this  letter,  to  which  I 
invite  the  attention  of  Senators  who  have  made  inquiries  of  me. 

Mr.  HOPKINS.  What  is  the  date? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  December  2,  1901,  written  to  the  board  of 
Army  officers  making  the  examination. 

Rio  Grande  City,  Tex., 

December  2,  1001. 

Liout.  Gen.  Nelson  A.  Miles, 

V/aiiUiii(jtQn,  D.  G. 

Dear  Sir  : 

^ * # * # * * 


Now,  if  a party  of  bandits,  cattle  thieves,  or  revolutionists  cross  from 
Mexico — and  the  river  is  no  obstacle — the  first  thing  they  would  do 
would  be  to  cut  the  wire,  and  then  they  would  have  full  sweep  for  a 
week  or  ten  days,  until  word  could  be  gotten  to  Laredo  and  troops  sent 
on  the  long  march  here.  We  could  doubtless  oppose  some  resistance, 
especially  to  a small  party,  but  remember  that  this  frontier  is  inhabited 
almost  entirely  by  Mexicans,  few  of  Avhom,  in  the  case  of  revolutionists 
coming  over,  would  be  inclined  to  take  part  with  us,  and  some  might 
even  actively  assist  the  revolutionists.  Starr  County  (in  v/hich  Fort 
Ringgold  is  situated)  contains  over  11,000  people,  and  of  these  less  than 
100  are  Americans  and  negroes.  The  proportions  are  about  the  same 
in  the  adjoining  counties  of  Zapata  and  Hidalgo,  though  in  Cameron 
County  (the  site  of  Fort  Brown)  the  proportion  of  Americans  is  slightly 
larger.  All  this  was  shown  clearly  at  the  time  of  the  “ Garza  revolu- 
tion ” in  1891,  when  several  troops  of  cavalry  and  companies  of  infan- 
try of  our  Army,  aided  by  State  rangers  and  deputy  sheriffs,  found 
themselves  for  a long  time  unable  to  capture  these  few  revolutionists 
on  account  of  the  nature  of  the  country  and  the  sympathy  of  many  of 
the  people  with  their  cause.  The  history  of  Mexico  shows  that  many 
of  the  revolutions  that  have  distracted  that  country  had  their  origin 
and  found  their  strongest  support  on  both  sides  of  this  frontier.  I am 
informed  that  President  Diaz  himself  started  his  revolution  at,  and 
was  equipped  from,  Brownsville.  If  our  neutrality  laws  and  our  obliga- 
tions to  a friendly  nation  are  to  be  observed,  troops  must  be  maintained 
at  one  or  two  points  betv/een  Laredo  and  the  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande, 
to  cut  off  in  the  bud  incipient  revolutions  starting  up  here. 

I think  that  the  time  of  the  great  cattle  raids  is  over,  but  a period 
of  disturbance,  to  be  feared  upon  the  death  of  Mexico's  strong  ruler, 
might  cause  their  renewal.  They  were  common  on  this  frontier  up  to 
a few  years  ago.  In  18b9  the  War  Department  withdrew  all  troops 
from  the  lower  Rio  Grande  posts,  and  the  consequence  was  the  great 
Cortina  raid  from  Mexico,  when  the  robber  general  Cortina  seized  the 
city  of  Brownsville,  killed  the  chief  of  police  and  a few  other  citizens, 
and  held  a carnival  of  robbery,  outrage,  and  crime,  until,  at  our  ui*gent 
solicitation,  the  Mexican  authorities  of  Matamoros  sent  over  a com- 
pany or  two  of  troops  to  protect  our  people,  and  moved  the  rest  of 
the  regiment  down  to  the  river  bank,  ready  to  cross  if  needed.  The 
War  Department  did  what  it  could  to  remedy  the  original  mistake,  and 
hurried  troops  down  (under  command  of  Col.  Robert  E.  Lee,  if  I re- 
member aright),  but  the  march  was  long,  and  tliey  would  not  have 
arrived  in  time  to  prevent  a general  massacre  but  for  the  timely  and 
illegal  action  of  the  Mexican  authorities.  That,  sir,  was  a time — 

And  I wish  Senators  would  pay  particular  attention,  because 
this  is  from  a Texas  citizen — 


That,  sir,  was  a time  not  only  of  danger,  but  of  abasement  1o  our 
people,  when  they  saw  their  town  in  possession  of  robbers,  the  Amcri- 
4181(5 — 7738 


32 


can  flag  at  the  post  filthily  dishonored,  their  Government  helpless  to 
aid  them,  and  the  preservation  of  their  lives  and  the  honor  of  their 
women  due  only  to  the  kindly  but  humiliating  assistance  of  a friendly 
nation.  Nor  was  it  an  easy  task  for  our  troops  to  overcome  this  banil 
of  robbers.  The  campaign  lasted  two  or  three  months,  and  was  con- 
ducted all  up  and  down  the  river  with  varying  fortunes,  including  one 
most  inglorious  defeat,  before  they  were  driven  back  crushed  into  Mex- 
ico. The  archives  of  the  War  Department  must  contain  a full  account 
of  this  great  raid,  as  well  as  of  the  many  smaller  ones,  both  before  and 
since,  that  have  plagued  our  people  and  demonstrated  the  usefulness 
of  a standing  army  in  time  of  peace. 

As  to  riots  and  uprisings  originating  on  this  side  of  the  river,  they 
are  no  longer  to  be  expected.  Yet  v^e  can  not  forget  the  great  riot  here 
in  1888,  when  only  the  presence  of  the  troops  prevented  a massacre. 
It  will  be  remembered  that  on  that  occasion  the  wire  was  cut  by  the 
rioters  (fortunately,  just  too  late)  and  the  town  was  in -their  hands, 
but  Colonel  Clendenning  got  out  his  Gatling  guns,  turned  out  his  troops, 
and  with  a strong  hand  protected  the  refugees  from  the  mob  until  the 
arrival  of  State  Rangers  and  deputies  from  other  counties  restored 
order. 


Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Vv^ho  signed  that  letter? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  It  was  addressed  to  General  Miles,  and 
is  signed  by  G.  W.  Seabnry,  representing  the  eighty-fifth  legis- 
lative district. 


But,  apart  from  what  the  troops  accomplish  by  their  actions,  their 
mere  presence  holds  in  check  the  lawless  element  always  to  be  found  on 
frontiers,  and  has  been  of  the  utmost  value  to  this  section  and  the 
country  in  general.  Local  protection  is  generally  to  be  expected  from 
local  sources,  but  we  stand  here  to  protect  not  only  ourselves,  but  the 
whole  interior,  from  the  lav/lessness  and  crime  of  refugees  from  Mex- 
ican justice.  As  we  suffer  so  much  for  the  country,  I think  it  not  un- 
reasonable for  the  country  to  aid  us  through  United  States  troops  and 
State  Rangers. 

I do  not  deny  that  the  expense  of  these  posts  is  great,  but  they  are 
worth  to  the  country  at  large  vastly  more  than  the  amount  expended 
on  them.  If  there  were  no  people  here  to  protect,  the  enforcement  of 
our  laws  and  obligations  of  neutrality  alone,  not  to  speak  of  interna- 
tional complications,  would  imperatively  demand  their  retention.  * ='  * 
Very  trul}%  yours, 

G.  W.  Seabury, 

Reprcsentutive,  Eightij-fifth  Legislative  District. 


Rio  Grande  City,  Tex.,  Dcccmhcr  5,  1901. 
President  Theodore  Roosevelt, 

Washington,  D.  G. 

Honorable  Sir  : I understand  that  the  United  States  troops  are  to 
be  removed  from  the  Texas  frontier  posts.  Forts  Ringgold  and  Brown. 
I trust  I may  be  pardoned  if  I say  that  in  the  opinion  of  all  hero  it 
would  be  a most  unwise  and  detrimental  move  for  the  peace  and  quiet 
of  the  frontier,  keeping  the  resident  population  in  a constant  state  of 
fear  and  unrest,  besides  retarding  progress  in  the  way  of  immigration, 
which  is  just  now  for  the  first  time  beginning  to  come  this  way.  We  are 
now  having  peace,  quiet,  and  progress  from  the  fact  that  the  United 
States  troops  are  present,  and  it  is  only  the  knowledge  of  that  fact 
that  keeps  the  turbulent  element  (mostly  Mexicans)  down,  saving  us 
from  raids,  robberies,  and  loss  of  life.  I know  v/hereof  I write,  having 
lived  on  the  frontier  for  over  fifty-two  years,  having  knowledge  of  and 
have  experienced  much  of  it.  I will  call  your  attention  to  the  Cor- 
tina raid  in  1859,  just  after  the  removal  of  the  troops.  In  1888  the 
presence  of  the  garrison,  during  the  Garsa-Seebre  trouble,  saved  the 
lives  and  property  of  the  Americans  here,  when  if  the  Mexicans  could 
have  reached  Seebre  and  Dillard,  the  twm  Americans  connected  wuth  the 
alfair,  they  would  not  have  stayed  their  hands  until  every  American 
in  the  place  had  been  killed  ; but  the  two  named  above  fied  to  the  post 
for  security,  thus  saving  themselves  and  other  American  citizens.  Also, 
during  the  Spanish-American  war  in  1898.  we  wmre  threatened  by  raids 
ostensibly  gotten  up  by  Spaniards  in  Mexico,  under  the  pretense  of 
patriotism,  but  in  reality  for  the  purpose  of  plunder,  only  the  presence 
of  United  States  troops  keeping  them  in  abeyance. 

Our  position  here  is  none  too  secure,  conditions  now'  being  the  same 
as  ever.  We  hope  and  trust  this  stop  will  be  well  considered  in  the 
interest  of  the  law-abiding  citizens  and  the  Texas  frontier. 

An  American  Citizen. 


4181G--7738 


33 


Mr.  PILES.  I should  like  to  inquire  of  the  Senator  whether 
these  riots  he  speaks  of  were  participated  in  by  Mexican 
soldiers,  according  to  the  showing  he  has  made? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  No.  In  that  case  the  Mexican  soldiers 
came  across  the  river  and  helped  to  drive  out  the  band  of 
robbers  who  had  Brownsville  in  their  possession. 

Mr.  PILES.  In  the  riots  spoken  of  in  this  letter,  were  the 
participants  confined  altogether  to  piembers  of  robber  bands? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I think  so ; and  cattle  thieves. 

Mr.  PILES.  Mexican  cattle  thieves? 

Mr.  NELSON.  Revolutionists. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Revolutionists  who  inhabited  this  territory. 

Mr.  PILES.  As  to  any  of  the  riots  referred  to  by  the  Sena- 
tor from  Connecticut,  I will  ask  if  there  is  any  showing  that 
the  participants  shot  up  private  houses  in  Brownsville,  or 
whether  it  was  confined  to  riots  in  the  streets  or  even  to  raids, 
on  mercantile  establishmeiits  and  saloons.  I wish  to  know 
whether  any  of  the  riots  were  carried  so  far  as  to  make  assaults 
on  private  residences? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I have  read  all  of  the  extracts  that  seemed 
to  me  pertinent.  The  town  of  Brownsville  was  for  two  or 
throe  days  on  one  occasion  in  possession  of  these  robbers,  and 
that  I thought  should  be  distinctly  understood.  The  robbers, 
not  soldiers,  took  possession  of  the  Government  post  and  pulled 
down  and  trailed  in  the  dirt  the  American  fiag;  and  it  was  not 
until  the  Mexican  soldiers  were  appealed  to  to  come  and  rescue 
the  city  from  this  lawless  element  that  Mexican  soldiers  were 
sent  over  and  finally  drove  them  out  before  United  States 
troops  could  reach  the  point. 

I have  quoted  thus  freely  from  these  appeals  from  the  people 
.of  the  Texas  frontier,  in  order  to  call  attention  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  population  and  the  dangers  arising  to  the  settled 
communities  from  the  outlaws  from  both  sides  of  the  Rio 
Grande  and  contiguous  to  these  communities.  I regard  these 
facts  as  important  in  view  of  previous  raids  into  the  settled 
towns  as  alluded  to  in  the  correspondence,  and  also  in 
view  of  what  we  find  more  than  once  in  the  evidence  before 
your  committee,  that  on  the  night  of  the  raid  at  Brownsville 
and  shortly  before  the  firing  commenced,  a party  of  horsemen, 
greater  or  less  in  number,  vrere  heard  rapidly  riding  over  the 
county  road  but  a short  distance  outside  the  reservation  and 
directly  connecting  with  the  Garrison  road,  or  Fifteenth  street, 
where  the  firing  shortly  after  commenced. 

] have  in  my  remarks  various  affidavits  and  statements  of  the 
few  persons  and  soldiers  who  were  awake  at  the  time  the 
affray  commenced.  I will  quote: 

[S.  Doc.  No.  155,  p.  512.] 

r<-i-soiially  appeared  before  me,  the  undersigned  authority,  one  William 
Harden,  a private  of  (’ompany  13,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  who,  being 
duly  sworn  according  to  law,  deposes  and  says,  as  follows  : 

“ I was  in  the  post  hospital  at  Fort  Drown,  Tex.,  asleep  on  my 
bunk,  on  the  night  of  August  1.3,  1000,  when  the  shooting  took  place 
at  that  post.  The  shooting  woke  me  uj).  I got  up  and  came  out  on 
the  front  porch  toward  town  with  the  hospital  steward  and  the  other 
patients.  When  I got  out  on  the  hospital  porch  I hoard  a bunch  of 
mounted  people  gaIloi)ing  along  the  wire  fence  from  east  to  west  along 
the  north  boundary  of  tlie  i)ost.  3'hey  were  coming  from  the  northeast 
corner  of  the  wire  fence.  They  ojicned  up  a tire  near  where  the  wire 
fence  .puns  the  wall,  in  rear  of  the  first  set  of  bari’acks. 

41810—7738 3 


84 


That  was  in  the  neighborhood  of  this  county  road. 

“ They  fired  a few  shots  here,  I don’t  know  exactly  how  many,  and  then 
rode  on  along  the  wall  to  where  most  of  the  firing  took  place — in  rear  of 
B and  C Company  barracks.  Firing  ceased  soon  after  call  to  arms 
sounded.  Some  six  or  seven  bullets  came  over  the  hospital.  We  got 
behind  those  big  brick  pillars.  The  bullets  were  lead  bullets,  because 
they  had  a coarse  hum  and  did  not  sing  like  a steel  bullet.  It  was  too 
dark  to  see  any  persons.  I knew  nothing  about  any  trouble. 

“And  further  the  deponent  saith  not. 

“ William  Hakden, 
“Company  B,  Tiventy-fifth  Infantry  ” 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me,  at  Fort  Reno,  Okla.,  this  25th 
day  of  September,  190G. 

Samuel  P.  Lyon, 

Captain,  Ticenty-fifth  Infantry,  Sumntarp  Court. 

[Testimony  of  William  Harden,  pp.,  598-599.] 

Q.  That  is  the  roadway  inside  of  the  reservation? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  There  is  a roadway  outside  of  the  reservation? — A.  Yes,  sir; 
there  is  a roadway  outside.  I heard  these  two  rapid  shots  that  way, 
outside,  eastward  from  the  hospital,  and  I jumps  up  and  runs  out  on 
the  porch,  and  I meets  Nolan  and  Sanborn,  and  when  I got  out  on  the 
porch  I heard  a crowd  of  horses  galloping ; when  I got  out  they  had 
got  pretty  near  the  corner  and  had  gotten  about  the  corner  of  that 
fence.  They  had  got  about  where  the  barbed-wire  fence  connected 
with  the  wall,  and  they  opened  up  some  shots,  and  then  they -galloped 
on  down  to  the  main  gate  and  opened  up — I don’t  know  how  many 
shots — I guess  a hundred  or  more  shots  were  fired  there.  Sanborn, 
being  a first-class  private  in  charge,  he  made  myself  and  Nolan  get  be- 
hind the  pillars  in  the  old  hospital  building  thei*e.  That  is  an  old 
Spanish  building,  a big  old  building,  and  we  got  behind  those  pillars 
to  keep  from  getting  hit  with  stray  bullets  coming  from  the  southeast 
over  the  hospital.  lie  made  us  get  behind  there  to  keep  from  getting- 
hit.  And  these  was  lead  bullets. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  hear? — A.  I heard  some  seven  or  eight  bullets 
go  over  the  hospital. 

Q.  What  else  did  you  hear  that  you  can  tell  us  about? — A.  After  he 
made  us  get  behind  these  brick  abutments,  the  call  to  arms  went,  and 
about  three  or  four  minutes  after  the  call  to  arms  went  firing  ceased. 
And  the  last  shot  that  was  fired  was  fired  away  downtown.  It  was  an 
old  musket  or  shotgun  of  some  kind,  fired  away  downtown.  We  all  had 
formed  on  the  porch  there,  and  had  talked  there  and  wondered  about 
the  shooting,  and  he  made  us  patients  go  to  bed. 

Pages  601-C02 : 

Q.  I think  we  understand  that.  Now,  you  got  out  (without  going 
over  all  this),  and  you  heard  the.sc  horsemen  galloping  by? — A.  When 
I got  out  I heard  these  horses  galloping  just  before  the  road  turns  to 
go  down  to  the  barracks. 

Q.  You  have  been  in  the  service  how  long? — A.  Since  1905,  the  last 
time. 

Q.  IIow  long  before  that? — A.  I went  out  on  a short-order  furlough 
at  Fort  Logan.  I v,mnt  cut  in  1903  and  I was  out  until  1905,  when  I 
reenlist6d. 

Q.  From  the  sound  of  these  men  galloping  by,  how  many  men  were 
there? — A.  As  nigh  as  I can  get  at  it  from  my  knowledge.  I guess  there 
was  from  twelve  to  fifteen.  You  know  this — if  I may  ask  the  Senator 
a question. 

* * * * * * # 

Q.  IIow  do  you  know  how  many  horsemen  there  were?— A.  I don't 
know.  I said  from  my  knowledge  it  might  have  been  twelve  or  fifteen 
horses. 

Q.  They  were  making  no  noise,  of  course? — A.  They  were  making 
a lot  of  noise. 

Q.  They  were  not  trying  to  keep  it  seci’et,  at  all?  Are  you  certain 
they  were  making  a noise? — A.  They  were  galloping.  I heard  their 
hoofs  against  the  ground,  of  course. 

Q.  Were  the  riders  making  any  noise? — A.  No,  sir;  the  riders  were 
not  making  any  noise  ; only  I heard  their  galloping. 

(}.  There  was  no  hollering? — A.  No,  sir;  no  hollering. 

Q.  No  shouting? — A.  What  is  that? 

Q.  No  shouting  by  the  men  on  horseback? — A.  No,  sir;  the  men 
couldn’t  shout  on  horseback  unless  they  were  hollering. 

(}.  When  the  men  were  galloping,  the  firing  was  right  toward  the 
hospital  ? — A.  Yes  : but  wait  a minute. 

4181G— 7738 


Q.  Yes ; I will. — A.  When  the  first  shot  was  fired  the  horses  gal- 
loped around,  and  when  they  got  to  the  joining  of  the  wall  they 
opened  up  a fire  again,  and  then  when  they  got  down  to  the  gate  then 
all  this  firing  commenced.  That  is  when  the  man  made  me  and  the 
other  men  get  down  behind  the  brick  abutments. 

[Testimony  of  Samuel  Wheeler,  pp.  G42-643-C45.] 

Q.  What  was  the  conversation  you  had  with  General  Garlington? — 
A.  He  asked  me  about  the  knowledge  I had  of  this  shooting. 

Q.  You  told  him? — A.  Yes,  sir;  I told  him,  and  when  he  explained 
it  to  me,  then  I went  on  to  tell  him  that  I thought  that  the  people  of 
Brownsville  did  this  shooting,  myself,  and  he  said  “ Never  mind 
about  that ; just  answer  such  questions  as  are  asked  of  you.”  So  I 
quit.  I was  a soldier,  and  subject  to  orders,  and  didn’t  wish  to  give  the 
General  any  insubordination  ; and  so  he  said  that  would  do. 

Q.  He  asked  you  to  tell  all  you  knew  of  this  shooting? — A.  No,  sir; 
he  did  not  ask  me  to  tell  all  I knew  about  the  shooting. 

Q.  Did  you  understand  that  he  wanted  you  to  tell  all  you  knew 
about  it? — A.  I might  have. 

Q.  Were  you  ready  to  tell  all  you  knew  about  it? — A.  I have  tried 
to  always. 

Q.  Vfere  you  ready  to  teli  all  you  knew  if  he  had  asked  you  to  tell 
all  you  knew? — A.  Y"es,  sir. 

Q.  Did  he  ask  you  to  tell  him  about  hearing  those  horses  galloping 
by  ? — A.  I hadn’t  gotten  to  that  point. 

Q.  He  never  refused  to  let  you  tell  him  about  that? — A.  I was 
telling  him  about  the  shooting.  I didn’t  know  whether  the  horses 
had  anything  to  do  with  the  shooting  ; only  I knev/  I heard  some  horses 
going  very  rapidly. 

Q.  Was  that  a horse  or  some  horses? — A.  I said  “horses”  in  the 
first  beginning,  I think,  sir.  It  wasn't  one  horse,  I am  sure. 

Q.  liow  many  horses? 

Senator  Foeaker.  He  said  three  or  four  horses. 

Senator  Warner.  I did  not  hear  the  three  or  four.  I did  not  hear 
the  witness  say  that. 

By  Senator  Warner  : 

Q.  .Tust  approximate,  as  near  as  you  can,  how  many  horses  you 
heard. — A.  Well,  sir,  it  seemed  to  me  it  might  have  been  about  four 
horses — three  or  four  horses.  I didn’t  see  them  ; I only  heard  them. 

Q.  Then  when  you  heard  those  horsemen  going  that  way,  the  fu- 
sillade was  over? — A.  No,  sir;  that  was  during  the  fusillade,  during 
the  shooting,  sir.  That  was  right  along  during  the  shooting.  It 
seemed  as  though  he  must  have  had  an  awful  gun.  I could  hear  the 
reports  from  it,  it  seemed  like  a mile,  down  through  the  tov;n. 

Q.  But  confining  it  to  this  other  point,  now,  as  to  those  horses  gal- 
loping, when  was  that,  in  reference  to  the  fusillade  you  heard? — A. 
Right  along  the  latter  part  of  it. 

Q.  So  that  if  there  was  anyone  upon  those  horses,  they  could  have 
had  nothing  to  do  with  the  fusillade  down  in  the  direction  of  Elizabeth 
street? — A.  They  could  have  had  a good  deal  to  do  with  it.  It  might 
have  been  another  party  down  there.  They  could  have  connected 
with  it. 

Q.  Yes ; another  body.  But  that  body  you  heard  up  there  going 

out  Adams  street A.  I didn’t  say  they  were  going  out  Adams 

street.  I don't  know  what  street  they  were  going  out. 

******* 

Q.  Well,  whether  one  or  more  ; did  you  think  at  the  time  that  that 
had  notliing  to  do  with  the  shooting,  and  therefore  did  not  make  the 
statement? — A.  That  the  horses  passing  by  at  that  time 

Q.  Yes;  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  shooting? — A.  Had  nothing  to 
do  with  the  shooting. 

Q.  No,  sir? — A.  No,  sir;  I don’t  believe  any  horses  would  travel 
with  that  force  that  those  horses  w’ere  traveling  with,  unless  some- 
thing was  forcing  them  along.  It  is  not  usual  for  horses  to  travel 
with  the  force  that  these  horses  were  traveling  with  without  some- 
body is  driving  them.  The  horses  seemed  to  be  traveling  with  great 
speed. 

And  you  thought  those  horses  were  mounted,  then?— A.  I thought 
they  must  have  been  mounted  by  some  one,  and  tlu'  onc.s  they  were 
mounted  by  must  have  been  connected  with  this  shooting. 

It  was  also  in  ovuRuict'  l)(‘for(‘  yonr  ooniinittoo  (soo  tostiinony 
of  caistoni  ollifTV.s  and  others)  of  the  d(!Si)(‘rato  eneounttM's  witli 
41810 — TT.’hS 


36 


smugglers  and  criminals;  that  this  adjacent  territory  was  in- 
fested with  bandits  and  robbers,  as  well  as  deserters  from  the 
Army,  One  custom  officer — and  he  is  the  one  that  committed 
the  assault  upon  the  soldier  Newton — testified  that  during  his 
term  of  service  he  had  made  more  than  600  arrests.  With  this 
admitted  criminal  population  constantly  under  the  surveillance 
of  the  officers  of  the  law,  would  it  be,  IMr.  President,  a wild 
stretch  of  one’s  imagination  to  locate,  with  reason,  the  so-called 
“ conspiracy  ” to  raid  the  city  of  Brownsville,  and  in  connection 
with  the  lawless  element  located  there  to  seek  vengeance  on  the 
officers  of  the  law,  both  local  and  national,  who  had  so  often 
brought  them  witliin  the  clutches  of  justice?  Aiid  if,  in  their 
murderous  raids  against  officials,  they  should  disregard,  en- 
danger, or  take  the  lives  of  unoffending  citizens  it  would  not 
be  an  unnatural  conclusion. 

Brownsville  itself  is  essentially  a town  of  Mexican  charac- 
teristics ; its  population  is  largely  of  Mexicans  or  of  Mexican  or 
Spanish  descent,  and  the  predominating  language  used  by  all  is 
the  Spanish.  Its  police  force  is  composed  of  Mexicans,  v/ho 
speak  the  English  language  indifferently  or  not  at  all.  Its 
streets  are  poorly  lighted,  as  was  stated  by  the  President  in  one 
of  his  messages,  from  which  I quote : 

The  streets  are  poorly  lighted,  and  the  night  was  very  dark. 

This  statement  is  fully  corroborated  by  Major  Penrose  and 
every  one  of  his  officers,  who  repeatedly  testified — and  their 
testimony  is  uncontradicted — that  it  was  impossible  in  the  open 
grounds  of  the  post  to  distinguish  or  identify  their  own  men,  on 
account  of  the  darkness,  at  a greater  distance  than  from  5 to 
10  feet. 

On  the  map  furnished  by  the  Government  as  an  exhibit  and 
appended  to  Senate  document  155  (the  little  map,  which  Sena- 
tors will  find  on  their  desks,  is  a reduction  of  this  map)  the 
lights  of  the  city  are  clearly  indicated.  I shall  be  glad  to  have 
Senators  examine  it,  if  they  choose,  for  their  own  information. 

Beference  to  this  map  furnished  by  the  Government  as  an  ex- 
hibit (S.  Doc.  No.  IGG),  on  which  the  street  lamps  are  indicated, 
shows  conclusively  that  on  the  route  covered  by  the  raid  there 
were  but  four  city  lamps,  including  Elizabeth  street;  and  on 
Garrison  road,  or  Fifteenth  street,  extending  the  whole  front  of 
the  reservation,  not  a single  lamp  is  located,  and  the  only  light 
this  whole  distance  on  this  road  was  a single  lamp  at  the  post 
gate  used  by  pedestrians.  The  Senator  from  Missouri  [Mr. 
Warner]  is  mistaken  wdien  he  locates  two  lamps  over  the  main 
gate,  as  examination  of  photo  Exhibit  No.  5 clearly  shows — as 
well  as  the  testimony  of  Major  Penrose  on  this  point — that  on 
Co  wen  alley,  the  location  of  the  principal  part  of  the  shooting, 
there  is  not  a single  lamp,  public  or  private,  its  entire  length 
from  Fifteenth  street  to  Twelfth,  and  on  Thirteenth  street — the 
route  taken  by  the  raiders — there  is  a lamp  located  at  the  cor- 
ner of  Elizabeth,  also  one  at  the  corner  of  Washington  street, 
300  feet  apart. 

Hearings,  volume  3,  pages  3021-3022 ; 

By  Senator  Rulkeley  ; • 

Q.  Where  was  the  light  at  the  gate? — A.  Right  on  one  of  the  posts, 
the  post  on  the  cast  side  of  the  gate.  There  is  a small  gate.  Thei-e 
is  a large  gate  to  the  wagon  road,  and  there  is  a small  gate  to  the 
4181G— 7738 


37 


footpath,  and  it  was  on  the  post,  or  I think  there  was  an  iron  rod  that 
went  over  the  gate,  and  it  was  suspended  from  that.  I think  that 
shows  in  one  of  the  pictures. 

Q.  There  was  only  one  lamp  there? — A.  Only  one  lamp. 

Q.  And  that  was  over  the  pedestrian  gate? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Bulkeley.  Not  three  lights. 

* H:  » 

By  Senator  Fop.akeu  : 

Q.  I show  you  the  picture  in  the  Purdy  report. — A.  No.  5. 

Q.  Does  that  correctly  represent  the  lamp  over  the  little  gate? — A. 
Yes,  sir  ; I think  that  lamp  is  right  there.  There  is  no  lamp  beyond 
that  at  all. 

Q.  There  were  no  lamps  that  night  over  the  big  gatepost? — A.  No, 
sir  ; there  was  no  light  over  the  big  post.  I don’t  think  they  are  fixed 
for  lights  at  all. 

On  Cowen  alley,  wliere  the  principal  part  of  the  shooting 
took  place,  there  is  not  a single  lamp,  public  or  private,  its 
entire  length — from  Fifteenth  street  to  Twelfth — and  on  Thir- 
teenth street,  the  route  taken  by  the  raiders,  there  is  a lamp 
at  the  corner  of  Elizabeth;  also  one  at  the  corner  of  Washing- 
ton street.  The  lamps  are  300  feet  apart,  and  they  are  kero- 
sene lamps  of  8 candlepower  only,  as  testified  to  by  Lien- 
tenant  Leckie,  who  was  sent  to  Brownsville  for  the  purpose 
of  an  investigation  of  all  the  surroundings.  Among  other 
things,  he  investigated  the  location  and  the  character  of  the 
lamps  and  their  candlepower.  All  Senators  know  for  them- 
selves the  amount  of  light  furnished  by  an  8-candlepower  kero- 
sene lamp  on  a public,  street  well  shaded  with  trees. 

Q.  It  has  been  suggested  here  by  a question,  I don’t  know  whether 
you  know  or  not,  that  the  fort  has  been  dismantled  since,  that  it  had 
been  dismantled  when  these  pictures  were  taken,  and  perhaps  the 
lamps  that  had  been  over  the  post  at  the  big  gate  had  been  removed. 
Have  you  a recollection  whether  there  were  any  lamps  over  the  post? — 
A.  I think  not,  sir. 

Q.  .Just  the  one  lamp  ? — A.  I think  there  was  just  that  one  lamp  lighted. 

Cowen  alley  is  midway  between  these  two  lamps  and  about 
120  feet  from  either.  It  is  testified  to  by  an  Army  officer  that 
these  lights  are  of  but  limited  candlepower  and  that  their  re- 
flection radius  does  not  extend  beyond  a distance  of  20  feet, 
which,  taken  in  connection  with  the  fact  (see  testimony  of 
Mayor  Combe)  that  these  streets  are  fairly  well  covered  with 
shade  trees,  would  indicate  that  these  few  lights,  located  as  I 
have  indicated,  would  furnish  little,  if  any,  help  in  the  identifi- 
cation of  the  raiders  by  people  aroused  from  their  slumbers  at 
midnight  looking  out  into  the  oblivion  of  midnight  darkness. 
Major  Blocksom,  page  427,  Senate  Document  No.  155,  said: 

None  of  the  individual  raiders  were  recognized.  Streets  are  poorly 
lighted,  and  it  was  a dark  night.  Those  who  saw  them  were  busy 
trying  to  keep  out  of  sight  themselves. 

These  quotations,  with  the  map  exhibits  of  the  street  light- 
ing, I believe  to  be  unquestionable,  and  there  is  little,  if  any, 
conflict  of  testimony  as  to  the  darkness  of  the  night,  so  that  it 
seems  unnecessary  to  quote  further  from  the  testimony  to 
establish  these  points. 

The  soldiers  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  were  not  welcome 
as  a garrison  for  Fort  lirown.  Soon  after  the  order  was  issued 
for  their  location  at  that  post  a remonstrance  against  such 
action  was  forwarded  to  the  War  Department.  (See  S.  Doe. 
No.  155,  p.  .301.) 

41810—77:18 


38 


[Extract  from  the  Annual  Report  of  the  Secretary  of  War  for  the  year 

1906.] 

DISCIPLINE THE  BUOWNSYILLE  AFFRAY. 

I am  very  sorry  to  record  a most  serious  breach  of  discipline  and 
the  commission  of  a heinous  crime  by  certain  members  of  a battalion 
of  the  Twenty-fifth  InfantiT,  Companies  B,  C,  and  D,  on  the  night  of 
the  13th  and  the  morning  of  the  14th  of  August,  at  Fort  Brown, 
Brownsville,  Tex. 

In  June  last  objection  was  made  to  the  stationing  of  this  battalion 
at  Fort  Brown  by  a resident  of  Brownsville  in  a letter  transmitted 
through  Senator  Culberson^  to  which  the  following  answer  was  made  : 

It  is  proper  to  state  at  this  point  that  the  citizen  of  Browns- 
ville who  wrote  this  letter  which  was  forwarded  to  the  War 
Department  and  who  had  testified  before  your  committee  criti- 
cised one  of  the  citizens  of  Brownsville  in  a public  speech  in 
the  city,  and  the  next  morning  he  was  ruthlessly  shot  on  the 
streets  of  Brownsville  by  the  son  of  the  witness,  showing  that 
there  is  not  an  entire  regard  even  in  the  city  of  Brownsville 
for  the  lives  of  their  own  white  citizens. 

War  Department, 
’Washington,  June  1906. 

lion.  C.  A.  Culberson, 

United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  O. 

My  Dear  Senator  : I have  the  honor  to  acknowledge  receipt  of  your 
note  of  June  1,  transmitting  a letter  from  Mr.  Sam  P.  Wreford,  of 
Brownsville,  Tex.,  stating  certain  objections  to  the  stationing  of  negro 
troops  at  Fort  Brov/n,  and  in  reply  to  say  that  the  matter  of  possible 
objections  of  this  character  was  very  carefully  considered  before  the 
order  was  made,  and  I regret  that  I can  not  see  my  way  clear  to 
rescind  it. 

The  fact  is  that  a certain  amount  of  race  prejudice  between  white 
and  black  seems  to  have  become  almost  universal  throughout  the  coun- 
try, and  no  matter  where  colored  troops  are  sent  there  are  always  some 
who  make  objections  to  their  coming.  It  is  a fact,  however,  as  shown 
by  our  records,  that  colored  troops  are  quite  as  well  disciplined  and 
behaved  as  the  average  of  other  troops,  and  it  does  not  seem  logical  to 
anticipate  any  greater  trouble  from  them  than  from  the  rest.  Friction 
occasionally  arises  with  intemperate  soldiers  wherever  they  are  sta- 
tioned, but  the  records  of  the  Army  also  tend  to  show  that  white  sol- 
diers average  a greater  degree  of  intemperance  than  colored  ones.  It 
has  sometimes  happened  that  communities  which  objected  to  the  coming 
of  colored  soldiers  have,  on  account  of  their  good  conduct,  entirely 
changed  their  view  and  commended  their  good  behavior  to  the  War 
Department. 

A change  of  station  was  necessary  for  these  colored  troops,  and  one- 
third  of  the  regiment  (a  battalion)  had  already  been  sent  to  Fort 
Bliss,  Tex.,  more  than  six  months  ago.  Since  tliat  time  no  complaint 
concerning  their  conduct  has  reached  the  War  Department,  so  far  as 
I know.  It  was  also  necessary  to  send  the  entue  regiment  to  the 
same  locality,  and  to  have  sent  it  anywhere  else  would  have  involved 
two  moves  for  the  battalion  now  at  Fort  Bliss  within  about  six  months. 
This  would  have  been  an  injustice  to  the  troops  concerned,  and  would, 
in  addition,  have  entailed  considerable  extra  expense  upon  the  Gov- 
ernment. 

Trusting  this  explanation  may  be  satisfactory  to  your  constituents, 
I remain. 

Very  truly,  yours,  Wm.  IT.  T.vft, 

Secretary  of  War. 

The  battalion  was  accordingly  sent  to  Fort  Brown  in  command  of 
Maj.  C.  W.  Penrose,  and  arrived  there  July  28,  1906.  Soon  after  its 
arrival  unfortunate  differences  arose  between  the  enlisted  men  and 
some  townspeople.  As  is  usual  iu  such  cases,  there  was  contradictory 
evidence  as  to  the  cause  for  the  troubles,  though  they  Avere  doubtless 
due  primarily  to  the  resentment  of  certain  of  the  townspeople  at  the 
proximity  of  a negro  battalion.  The  instances  of  friction  were  numer- 
ous and  notorious  enough  to  be  the  cause  of  much  discussion  in  the 
barrack  rooms  of  the  three  companies.  The  feeling  of  the  enlisted  men 
was  also  aroused  by  a discrimination  insisted  on  in  most  of  the  saloons 
of  the  town,  in  which  separate  bars  were  provided  for  them.  No  serious 
injury  was  done  to  any  of  the  colored  soldiers,  although  one  of  them 
was  knocked  down  by  a Government  official  named  Tate  with  a clubbed 
revolver  for  jostling  his  udfe,  as  he  charged,  and  another  was  pushed 
41816—7738 


39 


off  a gang  plank  by  a customs  inspector  into  the  mud  of  the  Rio 
Grande,  because  drunk  and  disorderly,  as  it  was  claimed. 

Under  date  of  August  17,  the  following  telegram  was  ad- 
dressed to  the  Secretary  of  War  (S.  Doc.  No.  155,  p.  23)  : 

[Telegram.] 

Dallas,  Tex.,  August  11,  1906. 
Secretahy  of  War,  Washington  D.  C.: 

Some  time  ago  I called  your  attention  to  the  danger  of  locating 
negro  troops  in  Texas,  especially  at  Brownsville.  The  I'ecent  out- 
rageous conduct  of  such  troops  there  fully  justifies  the  fact  of  the 
people  of  that  locality.  Can  not  these  troops  be  removed  at  once? 

C.  A.  Culberson. 

Lieut.  Harry  S.  Grier,  S.  Doc.  No.  155,  pages  115-116 : 

^ sf:  if:  ^ 

Q.  Did  you  hear  any  of  the  people  of  Brownsville  make  any  remarks 
about  the  colored  soldiers? — A.  I did. 

Q.  What  did  they  say? — A.  The  very  first  day  on  our  arrival  in 
Brownsville  I registered  at  the  Miller  Hotel,  and  in  conversation  with 
the  clerk  in  regard  to  colored  troops  being  sent  to  Texas  he  stated  that 
the  people  were  much  opposed  to  their  coming,  and  they  mustn’t  take 
any  undue  liberties  or  there  would  be  trouble. 

Q.  Do  you  know  his  name? — A.  I do  not,  except  he  is  night  clerk 
in  the  Miller  Hotel.  On  several  occasions  I have  heard  people  explain- 
ing, not  in  a resentful  way,  what  was  customary  for  the  colored  people 
to  do  in  that  part  of  Texas,  especially  about  drinking  in  bar  with 
white  men. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  any  soldiers  mistreated  in  Brownsville? — A.  No, 
sir  ; I did  not. 

Major  Blocksom  reports,  August  20,  1906  (S.  Doc.  No.  155, 
p.  71)  : 

Brownsville,  Tex., 

August  20,  1906. 

The  Military  Secretary,  United  States  Army, 

Washington,  D.  C.: 

Causes  of  disturbance  are  racial.  People  did  not  desire  colored  troops 
here,  and  showed  they  thought  them  inferior  socially  by  certain  slights 
and  denial  of  privileges  at  public  bars,  etc. 

* * * * * * # 

Page  65,  iintler  date  of  August  29  : 

* * * * sS 

I met  many  sterling  people  in  Brownsville.  The  majority  of  good 
business  men  recognize  the  proper  ethics  of  the  situation,  but  many 
others  of  a somewhat  lower  class  think  the  colored  soldier  should  be 
treated  like  the  negro  laborer  of  the  South.  It  must  be  confessed  the 
colored  soldier  is  much  more  aggressive  in  his  attitude  on  the  social 
equality  question  than  he  used  to  be. 

Very  respectfully,  A.  P.  Blocksom, 

Major,  Inspccto r- Genera  L 

jMcCaskey,  brigadier-geueral,  commanding  Soutliwostern  Di- 
vision and  Department  of  Texas,  August  17,  1906  (S.  Doc.  No. 
]55,  p.  24)  : 

[Telegram.] 

Camp  Mabry,  Austin,  Tex.,  August  11,  1906. 

Military  Secretary, 

War  Department,  Washington,  D.  €.: 

Unsatisfactory  conditions  at  Fort  Brown  and  Brownsville  continue. 
Citizens  appeal  to  State  officials,  on  account  of  abject  fear  of  women 
and  children,  to  have  present  garrison  removed.  Commanding  officer. 
Fort  Brown,  of  even  date,  wires  situation  grave.  One-third  garrison 
guarding  other  two-thirds  and  preventing  ingress  to  or  egress  from 
post.  Remarkable  and  unmilitary  situation.  Citizens  of  Brownsville 
entertain  race  hatred  to  an  extreme  degree,  making  it  necessary  to 
divert  competitors  returning  from  Fort  Sill,  fi'he  provocation  given 
soldiers  not  taken  into  account  by  civilians.  Recommend  temporary 
abandonment  of  Fort  Brown  as  a military  station  and  tliat  troops  now 
there  be  sent  to  Fort  Reno,  Okla. 

McCaskey, 

lirif/ad ier-General , ('onunanding 
Soutincestern  Dirinion  anil  Depai  tiiieii  t itj  Texas. 


4181G— 7738 


40 


Major  Blocksom  again  reports,  August  29  (Senate  Doc.  Xo.  * 
155,  p.  Gl)  : 

1.  The  soldiers  heard  they  were  not  to  go  to  Camp  Mabry  because 
Texas  troops  had  threatened  to  use  ball  cartridges  against  them  in 
maneuvers.  They  knew  Colonel  Hoyt  made  a request  that  the  Twenty- 
iifth  be  not  sent  to  Texas. 

2.  The  people  did  not  desire  the  colored  troops  and  thought  they 
should  not  be  sent  here.  I learned  this  'before  the  rumored  abandon- 
ment of  Brown  from  prominent  citizens,  members  of  the  committee 
of  safety,  etc.  I think  requests  were  sent  to  Senators,  Congressmen, 
etc.,  to  use  their  influence  in  the  matter,  but  am  not  positive.  If  a 
fact,  it  is  probably  known  at  the  War  Department. 

3.  Soldiers  of  the  Twenty-fifth  were  not  allowed  to  drink  with  white 
people  at  the  principal  bars  in  town,  though  in  some  cases  saloon  keep- 
ers put  up  a separate  bar  for  their  use.  this  having  an  opposite  effect 
to  that  intended.  The  bartender  was  killed  in  such  a saloon. 

Second  Lieut.  E.  P.  Thompson,  Twenty-sixth  Infantry,  makes 
the  following  affidavit  (S.  Doe.  No.  155,  p.  514)  ; 

San  Antonio,  County  of  Bexar,  The  State  of  Texas,  ss: 

Personally  appeared  before  me,  the  undersigned  authority,  one  Edwin 
P.  Thompson,  who,  being  sworn,  deposes  and  says  ; 

That  he  is  a second  lieutenant  in  the  Army  of  the  United  States  ; 
that  in  such  capacity  he  served  at  Fort  Brown,  Brownsville,  Uameron 
County,  State  of  Texas,  from  September  4,  1903,  until  August  13,  1906  ; 
that  when  it  was  known  that  a battalion  of  the  Twenty-fifth  United 
States  Infantry  was  to  garrison  the  post  many  derogatory  Temarks  were 
made  before  its  arrival  by  some  citizens  in  reference  to  the  colored  sol- 
diers in  words  as  follows,  or  words  to  the  like  effect : “ We  don’t  want 
the  damn  niggers  here  ; ” “ Niggers  will  always  cause  trouble ; ” “ To 
hell  with  the  colored  soldiers  ; we  want  white  men,”  and  that  he  is 
unable  to  fix  any  one  of  such  remarks  upon  any  one  citizen  owing  to 
the  frequency  with  which  like  remarks  were  made  and  the  period  of 
time  covered  ; that  various  minor  clashes  occurred  between  the  indi- 
vidual citizens  of  the  town  and  the  soldiers  ; that  one  Teofilo  Crixell, 
a saloonkeeper  of  Brownsville,  Tex.,  told  him  that  a row  had  occurred 
in  the  “ White  Elephant  ” saloon,  owned  by  one  Vicente  Crixell,  in 
words  to  this  effect,  to  wit : That  one  Bates,  a Federal  officer,  was  at 
the  bar  drinking  when  a colored  soldier  entered  and  asked  for  a drink  ; 
that  the  said  Bates  then  turned  to  the  soldier  and  said  no  nigger  could 
drink  at  the  same  bar  with  him.  and  that  upon  the  soldier  remarking 
that  he  was  as  good  as  any  white  man  said  Bates  drew  his  revolver 
and  hit  the  soldier  over  the  head  : said  Bates  then  going  to  the  police 
headquarters  and  offering  to  pay  his  own  fine. 

Further  deponent  saith  not. 

E.  P.  Thompson, 

Second  Lieutenant,  Txeenty-sixth  Infantry. 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me  this  27th  day  of  September,  1906. 

L.  M.  Purcell, 

Second  Lieutenant,  Ticenty-sixtli  Infantry,  Judge- Advocate. 

Testimony  of  this  cliaracter  might  be  multiplied  from  both 
officers  and  men,  but  I will  not  weary  the  Senate  with  further 
extracts  from  the  record  testimony.  These  few  indicate  the 
feeling  on  the  part  of  at  least  many  of  the  civilians  of  Browns- 
ville and  their  opposition  to  the  location  of  colored  troops  at 
Fort  Brown. 

IDENTIFICATION  OF  THE  RAIDERS. 

This  involves  one  of  the  important  questions  of  this  investi- 
gation. The  so-called  “ identification  ” of  eyewitnesses  is  en- 
titled to  most  careful  consideration.  I am  satisfied  from  listen- 
ing to  and  reviewing  the  testimony,  taking  into  consideration 
the  character  of  the  night,  the  midnight  hour  at  which  the  raid 
occurred,  the  dimly  lighted  and  shaded  streets  on  the  greater 
part  of  the  route  followed  by  the  raiders,  and  streets  and  alley 
not  lighted  at  all,  that  such  identifications  as  are  testified  to 
by  numerous  witnesses  were  absolutely  impossible.  I would 
not  accuse  all  of  these  witnesses  of  untruthfulness.  They  were 
im])resscd  with  the  fact  that  the  town  was  being  raided,  and 
41816—7738 


41 


that  whatever  forms  they  saw  in  the  darkness  was  necessarily 
a soldier — that  consequently  they  must  be  negro  soldiers,  as 
they  were  the  only  ones  located  in  that  vicinity. 

An  additional  fact  adding  another  possible  difficulty  in  dis- 
tinguishing the  character  or  identity  of  the  raiders  may  be 
found  in  the  testimony — uncoutradicted — that  the  old  clothing 
or’ uniforms  of  the  troops  were  thrown  away  and  appropriated 
by  the  Mexican  scavengers,  and  that  they  were  constantly  seen 
upon  the  streets  clad  in  these  discarded  uniforms.  (See  testi- 
mony of  Sergeant  Frazier,  p.  62-93,  vol.  1,  Hearings ; also  affi- 
davits of  numbers  of  men  to  the  same  effect,  S.  Doc.  155,  p.  232, 
233)  : 

Mr.  SCOTT.  Will  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  allow'^  me? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

^Ir.  SCOTT.  If  I remember  rightly,  the  Senator  from  Idaho 
[Mr.  Borah]  the  other  day  said  it  was  impossible  for  these 
uniforms  to  be  worn  unless  people  had  stolen  them.  Was  it  not 
in  evidence  that  the  Twenty-sixth  Regiment  threw  a great 
many  of  their  khaki  uniforms  and  old  hats  and  caps  away? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Yes;  I will  come  to  that  in  a moment. 

Mr.  SCOTT.  I thought  it  was  a rather  peculiar  statement 
at  the  time  the  Senator  from  Idaho  made  it. 

Mr.  BORAH.  Mr.  President 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER  (Mr.  Dick  in  the  chair).  Does 
the  Senator  from  Connecticut  yield  to  the  Senator  from  Idaho? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  BORAH.  I think  if  the  Senator  from  West  Virginia 
will  look  over  my  remarks,  he  will  find  that  I did  not  make 
the  statement  in  the  language  that  he  quotes.  But  if  it  should 
occur  that  the  uniforms  were  secured,  I should  like  to  have  the 
Senator  who  is  on  the  floor  explain  how  these  marauders  from 
the  outside  got  hold  of  them. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I think  I can  do  that  to  the  Senator’s 
entire  satisfaction  in  a few  moments. 

Mr.  SCOTT.  There  is  no  question  about  it. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I will  for  the  moment  say  they  could 
have  been  readily  secured  from  these  discarded  uniforms,  both 
from  the  refuse  left  by  the  Twenty-sixth  and  from  the  dis- 
carded uniforms  of  the  Twenty-fifth.  I will  present  evidence 
showing  that  when  they  left  Fort  Brown  the  discarded  uniforms 
were  dumped  upon  the  heap  and  taken  by  these  scavengers, 
Mexican  boys,  and  citizens. 

Mr.  SCOTT.  And  their  hats  and  caps  also. 

Mr.  BORAH.  Mr.  President 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  Does  the  Senator  from  Con- 
necticut yield  further  to  the  Senator  from  Idaho? 

iNIr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  BORAH.  Just  for  a question.  Do  I understand  the  Sen- 
ator’s contention  to  be  that  this  raid  was  done  by  citizens  of 
Brownsville,  or  by  people  who  came  into  the  town  that  night 
from  the  outside? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I stated  early  in  my  remarks,  I think 
quite  clearly,  that  in  my  belief  the  raiding  was  done  by  the  law- 
less element  from  outside  of  Brownsville,  aided  by  the  lawless 
element  located  therein. 

41810—7738 


Mr.  BORAH.  The  contention,  then,  as  I understand  it,  is 
that  there  were  some  people  who  came  into  Brownsville  that 
night  on  horseback  or  otherwise  and  participated? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  The  evidence  so  shows. 

Mr.  BORAH.  And  that  the  people  within  the  town  joined 
Vvith  those  from  the  outside? 

Mr.  SCOTT.  Certain  people. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I stated  my  theory  that  the  lawless  ele- 
ment— not  the  peaceful,  well-behaved  citizens  of  Brownsville, 
but  the  lawless  element  that  resided  within  and  without  the 
city,  smugglers  and  others,  who  were  constantly  under  the  sur- 
veillance and  within  the  clutches  of  the  officers  of  the  lav/ — 
t^onnived  at  this  conspiracy  which  I am  trying  to  show.  Here 
is  an  affidavit  with  thirty-six  names  attached  thereto : 

Affidavit  T. — General  affidavit — relative  to  citizens  weariny  old  caps, 

etc. 

Territory  of  Oklahoma^  County  of  Canadian,  ss: 

Personally  appeared  before  me  the  undersigned,  duly  authorized  to 
administer  oaths  in  and  for  the  county  and  Territory  aforesaid,  the 
Sollowing-named  persons,  who  certify  that  they  were  members  of  the 
Twenty-fifth  United  States  Infantry,  stationed  at  Fort  Brown,  Tex.  ; 

Affiants  allege  that  soon  after  arrival  at  said  fort  they  discarded  all 
their  old  uniform,  such  as  caps  and  uniform,  and  threw  the  same  out 
in  the  rear  of  the  garrison,  and  that  many  boys  and  men  soon  there- 
after were  seen  by  us  wearing  the  said  uniform  that  had  been  discarded, 
and  that  it  was  a common  sight  to  see  the  same,  as  herein  alleged. 

Affiants  further  allege  that  during  their  stay  at  Fort  Brown  they 
did  not  \vear  any  caps,  but  all  wore  hats. 

Thomas  .T.  Green. 

Temple  Thornton,  corporal  Company  D. 

.Tohn  K.  .7 ones. 

Barney  Harris. 

• Henry  W.  Brown. 

.Tames  Newton. 

Winter  Washington. 

Alonzo  Haley. 

.Joseph  Shank. 

Zachariah  Sparks. 

George  W.  Hall. 

.Toseph  .Tones. 

Charles  Dade. 

Strowder  Darnell. 

Henry  Borse. 

AVilliam  Van  TTouk. 

Robert  (his  x mark)  Williams  (mark  made 
by  reason  of  afflicted  right  hand). 

Edward  Jordon 

Jacob  Frazer,  first  sergeant  Company  D. 

Len  Reeves. 

John  A.  Jackson. 

Elmer  Peters. 

Robert  L.  Rogan. 

Dorsie  Willis. 

Elias  Gant. 

Albert  Holand. 

Richard  Crooke. 

George  W.  Newton. 

John  Slow. 

Jerry  E.  Reeves,  sergeant.  Company  D, 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry. 

Henry  Robinson. 

Walter  Johnson. 

James  H.  Ballard. 

Luther  T.  Thornton,  sergeant,  Company  D, 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry. 

William  R.  Jones. 

Samuel  Wheeler. 

Soi'gt.  ]Mlugo  Sanders 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Who  signed  this  document? 

41.S1G— 7738 


43 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  It  is  signed  by  about  forty  or  fifty  soldiers 
of  the  Twenty-fiftli  Infantry. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  Mr.  President 

The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  Does  the  Senator  from  Con- 
necticut yield  to  the  Senator  from  Ohio? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  FORAKER,  There  is  no  contradiction  of  the  testimony 
on  that  point.  The  citizens  of  Brownsville,  one  and  all,  who 
testified  on  that  point,  said  that  the  khaki  clothing  was  com- 
monly worn  by  Mexicans  and  by  all  kinds  and  classes  of  citi- 
zens; that  you  could  go  into  any  store  and  buy  a suit  of  khaki 
made  up,  which  in  the  nighttime  5 feet  away  from  yon  could 
not  be  distinguished  from  the  uniform  which  the  soldiers  wore. 
The  policemen  wore  that  kind  of  uniform. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I think  the  testimony  which  I am  about 
to  read  will  fully  justify  the  remarks  which  the  Senator  from 
Ohio  [Mr.  Fosaker]  has  so  kindly  made. 

Sergt.  Mingo  Sanders  was  a soldier  of  twenty-five  or  thirty 
years’  experience  in  the  Army.  All  of  his  officers  at  that  time, 
and  all  the  officers  that  had  been  connected  with  the  regiment 
during  his  long  service,  testified  as  to  his  standing  as  a soldier 
and  as  a man. 

On  page  339,  volume  1,  Hearings,  Sergt.  Mingo  Sanders  tes- 
tifies : 

♦ ♦ * # * * * 

Q.  I want  to  ask  you  a question  on  another  line.  Do  you  know  what 
kind  of  uniform  the"  policemen  of  Brownsville  wear? — A.  They  wore  a 
khaki  uniform. 

Q.  The  same  material  as  that  of  the  uniforms  of  the  soldiers? — A. 
Yes,  sir  ; they  were  the  same  material,  almost. 

Q.  Are  they  Americans  or  are  they  Mexicans,  those  policemen? — A. 
They  are  Mexicans. 

Q.  If  you  know  ? — A.*  They  are  Mexicans,  so  far  as  I seen  ; Mexican 
police. 

On  page  362,  Q.  M.  Sergt.  Thomas  J.  Green  testifies : 

♦ *»***!(' 

Q.  Did  you,  while  you  were  at  Brownsville,  see  any  of  the  policemen 
of  Brownsville? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  kind  of  uniform  do  they  wear? — A.  Khaki. 

Q.  Similar  to  what  the  soldiers  wear? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  kind  of  hat  did  they  have  on? — A.  The  campaign  hat. 

Q.  The  campaign  hat? — ^A.  Yes,  sir;  only  they  had  a gilded  cord 
around  it. 

By  Senator  Foraker  : 

Q.  Did  any  of  the  citizens  there  wear  khaki  clothing? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Senator  Taliaferro  : 

Q.  How  many  policemen  did  you  see? — .V.  I couldn't  tell  you,  sir. 

Q.  .Tust  approximately. — A.  1 have  seen  a good  many  of  them,  from 
time  to  time. 

Q.  And  you  remember  distinctly  that  they  wore  khaki  uniforms? — 
A.  The  policemen — that  is,  those  men  that  were  told  to  me  to  be  police- 
men— had  khaki  uniforms. 

Q.  And  hats  like  yours,  except  with  a different  kind  of  cord? — • 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Senator  Foraker  ; 

Q.  I will  ask  if  you  saw  Mexicans  running  around  there  with  khaki 
clothing  on,  or  not? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  an  unusual  thing,  to  see  citizens  dressed  in  khaki  ?^ — 
A.  Yes,  sir  ; lots  of  citizens  W'ore  khaki. 

Q.  It  was  not  unusual  to  see  it? — A.  No,  sir. 

By  Senator  Overman  : 

Q.  How  many  policemen  were  there  in  that  town,  do  you  know 
A.  No,  sir  ; I never  was  in  the  town  ever  three  or  four  times  the  whole 
time  I was  down  there. 

4181G— 7738 


44 


Q.  How  many  policomen  did  you  see? — A.  I have  answered  that 
question. 

Q.  You  say  every  policeman  you  saw  had  on  khaki.  How  many  did 
you  see? — ^A.  I don't  know.  Every  policeman  I saw  had  on  khaki  uni- 
form and  a campaign  hat. 

Q.  Was  that  the  same  man  that  you  sav/  each  time? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  did  you  see? — A.  I couldn’t  say. 

Q.  Can’t  you  give  me  an  estimate? — A.  No,  sir;  it  would  he  just  as 
impossible  to  tell  you  how  many  policemen  there  are  in  Brownsville  as 
how  many  there  are  here  in  Washington. 

To  impeach  the  testimony  of  many  if  not  the  greater  number 
of  these  eyev/itnesses  it  only  seems  necessary  to  quote  from 
the  official  utterances.  Under  date  of  January  12,  1907,  the  Sec- 
retary of  War  writes  to  the  President  (S.  Doc.  No.  155,  part  2, 
p.  17)  : 

There  is  a conflict  as  to  the  circumstances  growing  out  of  the  evi- 
dence of  the  witnesses,  which  is  entirely  natural  in  respect  to  transac- 
tions during  the  daytime,  and  still  more  natural  in  respect  to  the 
transactions  and  the  direction  of  sounds  during  the  night,  and  there 
are  some  things  about  the  evidence  of  McDonald,  Mrs.  Odin,  and  of 
Preciado,  who  testify  with  such  detail  as  to  seeing  the  negro  soldiers — 
the  one  at  garrison  wall,  the  next  at  the  alley  of  Miller’s  Hotel,  and 
che  third  at  the  Tillman  saloon — which,  in  view  of  previous  statements, 
shake  some  the  weight  of  what  they  say.  Mrs.  Odin’s  statements  bear 
evidence  of  being  affected  by  conversations  with  her  husband,  and 
there  is  a somewhat  suspicious  agreement  as  to  exact  details  between 
their  two  statements. 


Again,  the  Secretary  of  War  addressed  a commnneiation  to 
the  President  in  sending  an  additional  affidavit  in  the  case  of 
Preciado,  who,  if  anyone’s  testimony  was  good  for  anything, 
was  in  the  best  position  of  anybody  that  night  to  see  and 
identify  the  soldiers  if  the  raiders  were  soldiers.  I call  your 
attention  to  the  statement  of  the  Secretary  of  War. 

Senate  Document  No.  155,  part  2,  page  19 : 

Letter  of  the  Seeretary  of  IFar  to  the  President  relative  to  additional 
testimony  in  the  Brotcnsville  case. 


War  Depaetj^ient, 
Washington,  January  It),  1907. 

My  Dear  Mr.  President  : In  my  letter  transmitting  the  additional 
evidence  in  the  Brownsville  case,  I had  occasion  to  comment  on  the 
circumstances  which  impaired  the  weight  to  be  given  to  the  evidence  of 
I’aulino  I’reciado,  in  which  he  stated  that  he  saw’  the  four  or  five  men 
W’ho  killed  the  barkeeper,  and  recognized  them  as  negro  soidiers,  admit- 
ting on  examination  that  he  had  not  made  such  a statement  before,  ex- 
plaining it  by  saying  that  he  w’as  not  asked.  Since  sending  you  the 
evidence  and  my  letter  of  transmittal,  I have  come  across  what  pur- 
ports to  be,  and  w’hat  I believe  to  be,  a copy  of  a report  of  Preciado's 
evidence  before  the  grand  jury,  w’hich  expressly  contradicts  and  im- 
peaches his  evidence  upon  this  point.  I ask  that  this  be  forwarded  to 
the  Senate  with  your  message  and  the  other  papers. 

Very  respectfully, 

Wm.  H.  Taft, 

Secretary  of  IFa?’. 

The  President. 


Grand  Jury  Room,  Septemher  10,  1006. 

Paulino  Preciado,  being  duly  sw’orn,  deposes  and  says: 

“ I live  in  Brownsville,  Tex.  ; on  the  night  of  the  shooting  I was  in 
the  Ruby  saloon,  belonging  to  ISIr.  Tillman,  near  midnight.  We,  myself, 
Antonio  Torres,  Nicolas  Sanchez  Alanis,  and  Mr.  Tillman,  were  sitting 
in  the  yard,  when  w’e  heard  some  shots.  Tillman  got  up  at  once  and 
left  us.  We  remained  w’ith  the  bartender,  Frank  Natus ; the  latter 
closed  tlie  doors  toward  the  street;  in  the  meantime  the  shooting  be- 
came heavier,  fl’lien  the  bartender  w’^ent  to  close  tne  door  toward  the 
alley.  He  went  about  20  feet  toward  the  door,  wdien  a volley  v.’as 
fired.  Natus  exclaimed,  ‘Ay  Dios,’  and  fell  down  ; 1 saw’  him  because 
1 was  looking  in  Ib.at  direction  when  the  shots  were  fired.  I saw’  I w’as 
in  danger  and  went  to  one  side.  I could  not  see  anybody  in  the  alley, 
as  it  was  dark  out  there  and  I was  in  the  light.  I heard  no  word 
4181(5—77:58 


45 


spoken.  I hid  in  a corner  where  a brick  wall  protected  me  nntil  the 
shooting  was  over,  then  I went  to  close  the  alley  gate.  While  I was  in 
the  corner  I received  a slight  flesh  wound  on  the  left  hand,  and  another 
passed  through  my  coat  and  vest,  breaking  my  spectacles,  which  I 
carried  in  the  left  breast  pocket  of  my  coat,  but  did  not  hurt  me.  I 
think  I received  the  shots  at  the  time  Frank  Natus  fell,  but  did  nofl 
notice  it  at  the  time.  When  the  shooting  Avas  over  I went  and  opened 
the  front  door,  and  asked  the  crowd  of  people  who  were  there  if  there'" 
was  an  officer  amongst  them.  Mr.  Victoriaao  Fernandez  came  forward, 
and  I told  him  w’^hat  had  happened. 

“ Paulino  S.  Preciado.-’^ 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me,  this  10th  day  of  September,  190G. 

Wm.  Volz. 

Foreman  Grand  Jury. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  Mr.  President 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Ohio? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I do. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  If  the  Senator  will  allow  me,  I should  like 
to  interject  there,  for  the  benefit  of  Senators  who  are  not  fa- 
miliar with  this  record,  that  this  man  Preciado,  whom  the  Sec- 
retary of  War  thus  disposes  of,  is  the  only  man  w"ho,  according 
to  his  testimony,  claimed  to  have  the  benefit  of  artificial  light 
to  distinguish  the  men  who  were  doing  the  firing. 

j\rr.  CULBERSON.  Mr.  President 

Tlie  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Texas? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I do. 

Mr.  CULBERSON.  I will  ask  the  Senator  from  Ohio  if  the 
gentleman  who  sat  in  the  window  of  the  hotel,  the  Miller 
House,  did  not  declare  that  he  saw  them  by  the  light  in  the 
street? 

Mr.  FORAKER.  It  was  shown  by  the  testimony  that  there 
was  no  light  whatever  in  the  street  at  that  point. 

Mr.  CULBERSON.  The  Senator  does  not,  I think,  directly 
answ'er  the  question.  Did  not  the  gentleman — I have  forgotten 
his  name  just  for  the  moment 

Mv.  BULKELEY.  Odin. 

Mr.  CULBERSON.  Who  was  in  the  Miller  House,  declare 
that  he  saw  the  soldiers  by  the  light  in  the  street? 

Mr.  FORAKER.  I do  not  knoAV  the  witness  to  whom  the 
Senator  refers,  but  I do  know  that  the  testimony  shows  that 
there  was  no  light  by  which  anyone  could  have  seen  any  sol- 
dier in  the  street  at  the  point  where  it  was  claimed  he  saw 
them. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Noav,  Mr.  President,  diverging  from  the 
remarks  I have  written,  I want  to  reply  for  a moment  to  the 
question  which  was  first  interjected  by  the  distinguished  Sen- 
ator from  Texas  [Mr.  Culuerson],  as  to  the  witness  who 
was  impeached  to  some  extent — and  the  Secretary  of  War 
impeaches  the  testimony  of  his  wife  on  account  of  col- 
lusion between  the  two  as  to  the  details  of  the  testimony 
that  they  should  present  to  this  committee — the  facts 
are,  Mr.  President,  that  tliere  was  no  light  whatever  within 
150  feet  of  the  point  where  Odin  testified  ho  saw  those 
colored  soldiers  by  the  aid  of  artificial  light.  One  light 
was  located  on  the  corner  of  Washington  and  Thii-teenth 
streets,  and  the  other  light  at  the  corner  of  Thirteenth  street 
41810—7738 


46 


and  Elizabeth  street — more  than  300  feet  apart,  and  it  is  tesi- 
fied  that  none  of  these  city  lamps  was  more  than  8 candlepower. 
Mayor  Combe,  in  his  testimony,  in  answer  to  some  inquiries 
which  I made  myself,  testified  that  the  streets  were  compara- 
tively full  of  trees ; and  Lieutenant  Leckie  says  that  the 
reflective  power  of  all  these  city  lamps — “ the  reflective  radius,” 
as  he  expresses  it — was  not  to  exceed  20  feet.  If  that  testi- 
mony is  correct,  I would  ask  the  Senator  from  Texas,  or  any 
other  Senator,  what  possible  aid  from  those  lamps  could  this 
man,  sitting  with  his  wife,  and  whose  testimony  has  been 
equally  impeached  with  that  of  his  wife,  secure  from  those 
small  8-caudlepower  lamps,  with  a reflective  radius  of  20  feet, 
when  they  were  at  least  150  feet  away  from  the  locality  where 
this  man  Odin  said  he  saw  these  troops? 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Mr.  President 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecti- 
cut yield  to  the  Senator  from  Michigan? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I do. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  According  to  the  map  that  is 
upon  Senators'  desks,  there  seem  to  be  but  six  street  lamps 
within  a radius  of  about  that  many  blocks. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  There  were  only  four. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Four,  between  Twelfth  street  and 
the  fort? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I think  the  Senator  could  not  have  been 
here  when  I ex])lained  the  location  of  those  lamps. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  No. 

Mr.  BULKEIjEY.  From  Cowen  alley  from  Fifteenth  street 
to  Twelfth  street,  “which  is  the  route  taken  by  the  raiders,  as 
far  as  Thirteenth  street  there  is  not  a single  lamp,  public  or 
private.  From  Cowen  alley  to  the  corner  of  Thirteenth  and 
Washington  streets,  which  was  the  extreme  point  over  which 
the  raiders  traveled,  there  is  only  the  lamp  at  the  corner  of 
Thirteenth  and  Washington  streets.  So  that  on  the  direct  route 
over  which  the  raiders  went  there  was  not  a single  lamp  from 
the  fort  to  the  corner  of  Thirteenth  and  Washington  streets, 
where  the  first  and  only  lamp  was  located.  There  was  a 
light  on  Elizabeth  street,  20  or  30  feet  from  Cowen  alley,  and 
there  was  another  one  on  the  corner  of  Washington  and  Thir- 
teenth streets,  which  is  an  equal  distance  from  the  alley.  Those 
are  all  the  lights  that  were  in  all  this  territory. 

The  Secretary  of  War  says  the  testimony  of  Mrs.  Odin 
should  be  impeached  because  of  the  evident  collusion  with  her 
husband  as  to  the  details  of  their  testimony.  That  it  corre- 
sponds so  closely  in  its  details  is  evidence  of  that  fact.  I make 
the  claim,  Mr.  President,  and  I believe  it  is  a fair  one,  that  the 
evidence  of  Mr.  Odin  and  Mrs.  Odin,  for  the  reasons  stated  by 
the  Secretary  of  War,  even  if  the  facts  which  they  state  are 
true,  is  not  entitled  to  any  credence  in  this  investigation. 

The  lieutenant  of  the  police,  Dominguez,  who  lost  his  arm 
in  the  raid,  was  another  of  this  class  of  witnesses,  but  his  oppor- 
tunities to  see  the  raiders  were  limited  to  two  points  (see  testi- 
mony, vol.  3,  p.  2114),  as  the  soldiers  crossed  the  alley  at  Four- 
teenth street  and  again  as  he  rode  across  the  alley  at  its  inter- 
section with  Thirteenth  street,  when,  as  he  testified: 

I was  riding  fast  on  borsoback. 

4181G— -7738 


47 


Now,  to  contradict  liis  testimony,  I will  state  that  Policeman 
Padron  was  stationed  at  the  comer  of  Washington  and  Four- 
teenth streets,  where  the  lieutenant  testifies  that  he  went,  look- 
ing down  Fourteenth  street,  and  saw  these  soldiers  crossing  this 
alley  by  the  flash  of  the  guns. 

The  policeman,  Padron,  testifies  on  page  2145,  volume  3, 
Senate  hearings,  as  follows : 

******* 

Q.  But  I want  to  know  whether  this  firing  that  lighted  up  the  faces 
of  the  men  so  you  could  tell  their  uniforms,  whether  that  was  over 
when  the  lieutenant  arrived? — A.  I returned  from  the  corner  of 
Fourteenth  and  Washington,  along  Washington,  and  there  I met  the 
lieutenant. 

Q.  Did  not  the  lieutenant  come  to  Fourteenth  and  Washington 
streets? — A,  No;  he  came  to  about  the  middle  of  the  square. 

******* 

Q.  Did  the  lieutenant  go  down  with  you  to  Fourteenth  and  Wash- 
ington ? — A.  No  ; he  did  not  reach  that  point. 

******* 

Q.  Did  not  go  dowm  to  the  corner  at  all? — A.  No. 

******* 

If  this  testimony  of  the  policeman,  Padron,  is  to  be  relied  on, 
the  lieutenant  could  not  have  seen  the  soldiers  at  Cowen  alley 
and  Fourteenth  street,  as  he  has  testified;  at  the  only  other 
point  of  observation,  Cowen  alley  and  Thirteenth  street,  wdiere 
he  testifies  he  “ was  riding  fast,”  I submit,  Mr.  President,  that 
looking  down  into  a dark  and  absolutely  unlighted  alley  from  a 
distance  of  30  to  40  feet  that  any  sort  of  identification  would  be 
impossible. 

I now  come  to  the  poor  Mexican  woman  who  lived  with  the 
Cowen  family,  whose  house  was  located  at  the  corner  of  Four- 
teenth street  and  Cowen  alley,  facing  Fourteenth  street.  She 
was  evidently,  if  I could  judge  by  her  appearance  upon  the 
stand,  an  ignorant  Mexican  woman,  unable  to  speak  English, 
and  very  little  qualified,  so  far  as  I could  observe,  to  intelli- 
gently disclose,  for  many  reasons,  what  she  saw  or  thought  she 
saw  that  night. 

But  I want  to  call  the  attention  of  Senators  to  the  situation 
and  surroundings  of  the  house  from  which  her  observations 
were  made.  Here  is  a photograph  [exhibiting]  which  shows  the 
house.  If  any  Senators  are  interested  enough  at  any  tiine  to 
look  at  the  exhibits  which  are  in  the  files  of  the  Senate,  they 
will  find  this  photograph  is  No.  12  in  Senate  Document  No.  155. 

I call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  it  is  located  some  feet 
back  from  the  alley,  not  close  to  the  alley,  and  is  separated 
from  the  alley  by  a closed  board  fence  several  feet  in  height 
and,  as  the  evidence  shows,  coming  up  about  to  the  shoulders 
of  an  ordinary  man.  I say  it  would  have  been  impossible, 
looking  out  from  the  low  windows  of  this  low  house  over  this 
board  fence,  which  was  the  height  of  an  ordinary  man's  shoul- 
ders, for  this  woman,  who  was  only  at  the  window  for  a 
moment,  while  the  firing  was  in  progress,  to  bo  able  to  describe, 
with  such  completeness  as  she  states,  the  dress  of  a man  from 
head  to  foot — leggings — covered  by  a board  feiic'e — ])elt  around 
the  center  of  his  bodj^ — covered  by  a closed  board  fence,  and  of 
a sufficient  height  to  disclose  only  the  firings  that  were  over 
the  fence. 

So  I conclude  tliat  her  testimony  is  entitled  to  voiy  little, 
if  any.  credence,  because  I can  see,  and  I think  any  Senator 
4181G— 7738 


48 


who  will  give  it  thought  for  a moment  will  see,  that  standing 
as  those  men  must  have  been  on  the  ground,  and  a closed  board 
fence  between  them  and  this  low  Mexican  house,  which  this 
picture  discloses,  it  was  absolutely  impossible  for  anybody, 
whatever  their  intelligence,  looking  out  into  the  darkness,  to  be 
.nble,  in  the  detail  of  leggings  and  belts,  to  describe  from  head 
to  foot  the  clothing  of  anyone. 

Now,  another  witness,  and  the  one  to  which  the  Senator 
from  West  Virginia  [Mr.  Scott]  referred,  I could  dismiss  with- 
out a word  of  comment.  I feel  certain  that,  with  all  her  fear- 
lessness, because  she  asserted — and  her  appearance  justified  the 
assertion — that  she  did  not  stand  in  fear  bf  any  man — lightning 
was  the  only  thing  she  was  afraid  of — with  her  appearance  on 
the  witness  stand,  her  unfaA’orable  impression  on  the  other 
members  of  the  committee,  that  little,  if  any,  reliance  was  given 
to  her  testimony.  It  was  impossible  in  that  midnight  darkness 
and  looking  through  the  trees  of  the  surrounding  properties 
to  see  300  feet  away  and  distinguish  with  the  distinctness  which 
she  described  the  appearance  and  form  of  soldiers  on  the  porch 
of  the  barracks.  The  officers  of  that  fort  had  great  difficulty  in 
the  open  in  distinguishing  each  other  and  in  distinguishing 
themselves  at  distances  as  described  by  these  officers,  times 
without  number,  of  5 or  10  feet. 

These  witnesses  whom  I have  named — this  woman,  the  lieu- 
tenant of  police,  Preciado,  the  two  Odins,  and  McDonald — com- 
prise almost  the  entire  number  of  so-called  “ eyewitnesses  ” and 
“ identifiers  ’’  of  these  raiders. 

, iMr.  FULTON.  Mr.  President 

The  VICE-PPESIDENT.  _ Does  the  Senator  from  Connecti- 
cut vield  to  the  Senator  from  Oregon? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

INIr.  FULTON.  Will  it  interrupt  the  course  of  the  Senator’s 
argument  if  I ask  him  a question? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  No,  sir ; I shall  be  glad  to  yield. 

Mr.  FULTON.  I was  a member  of  the  Committee  on  Mili- 
tary Affairs  while  this  testimony  was  being  taken,  and  heard 
considerable  of  it,  and  read  it  all  very  carefully.  To  my  mind 
the  testimony  was  overwhelming  that  some  of  the  negro  sol- 
diers did  the  shooting.  The  Senator  takes  up  the  testimony 
of  each  individual  who  testified  that  he  or  she  saw  negro  sol- 
diers, identified  them  as  soldiers,  and  points  out  some  fact 
which,  to  his  mind,  tends  to  weaken  the  testimony  of  that  in- 
dividual. 

While  there  is  much  truth  in  what  the  Senator  says,  and  in 
the  criticisms  he  makes  on  the  individual  testimony,  there  was 
this  fact  which  appealed  to  me,  and  I ask  the  Senator  how  it 
affected  his  judgment:  That  immediately  after  the  shooting  the 
people  assembled,  as  naturally  they  would,  in  crowds  about  the 
town,  and  there  was  but  one  voice  from  all  of  the  people,  and 
that  was  that  the  shooting  had  been  done  by  the  negro  troops. 
There  was  no  dissenting  voice  in  any  crowd,  apparently. 
Everybody  who  at  that  time  said  he  had  seen  the  persons  who 
did  the  shooting  said  it  was  the  negro  troops.  Nobody  seemed 
to  make  any  other  statement.  There  could  have  been  no  con- 
spiracy extending  throughout  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  town 
to  cause  them  to  come  together  and  thus  talk  and  thus  designate 
the  j)erpetrators  of  the  outrage. 

4181G— 7738 


49 


Mr.  BULKELEY.  There  is  no  evidence  whatever  to  sub- 
stantiate even  the  suggestion  that  in  this  assembled  crowd 
there  was  a single  one  of  the  so-called  “ eyewitnesses.”  There  is 
every  evidence  to  my  mind  that  this  assembled  crowd  to  which 
the  Senator  has  alluded  embraced  a very  different  class  of 
men,  to  which  I shall  allude  at  a later  period  of  my  remarks. 

Mr.  FOliAKER.  I want  to  say  one  thing,  if  I may  be  per- 
mitted to  interrupt  the  Senator  to  say  it. 

Mr.  BULKhlEEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  It  is  in  answer  to  the  suggestion  of  the 
Senator  from  Oregon. 

The  testimony  to  which  he  refers  did  not  appeal  to  me  at  all, 
because,  without  an  exception,  the  men  who  merely  heard  the 
firing  and  who  did  not  pretend  to  see  anybody  were  convinced 
froin  the  first  shots,  according  to  their  own  testimony,  that  it 
was  the  negroes  and  nobody  else. 

Take  the  case  of  Mr.  Hammond,  who  was  sitting  at  the  Miller 
Hotel  and  heard  the  shots.  Fie  immediately  announced  “ The 
negroes  have  broken  out  at  the  garrison  and  are  shooting  up  the 
town.”  Nobody  had  told  him  anything.  The  state  of  mind  was 
such  that  the  citizens  of  that  town  seemed  to  jump  to  the  con- 
clusion, whether  they  saw  something  or  did  not  see  something, 
that  the  soldiers  were  doing  the  shooting. 

Mr.  FULTON.  It  would  perhaps  be  quite  natural  that  per- 
sons who  did  not  see  those  who  were  actually  engaged  in  the 
shooting,  but  who  heard  the  shooting  come  from  the  direction 
where  the  troops  were,  should  surmise  it  was  the  troops  who 
were  doing  the  shooting.  But  I think  the  Senator  from  Con- 
necticut is  mistaken  when  he  says  none  of  those  who  saw  the 
shooting  were  in  the  crowds  that  assembled. 

Mr.  BULKELEY".  Does  the  Senator  from  Oregon  claim  there 
is  any  evidence  to  show  there  was  one  man  in  the  crowd  who 
claimed  to  have  seen  the  shooting? 

Mr.  FULTON,  l^es.  I have  the  evidence  here. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Except  possibly  the  policeman. 

l\Ir.  FULTON.  The  policeman  and  some  of  the  others ; those 
who  were  around  in  saloons. 

Mr.  BULKELEY'.  I think  if  the  Senator  will  wait  until  I 
reach  that  point,  he  will  see  the  character  of  that  crowd. 

Mr.  FULTON.  But  what  I desired  particularly  to  call  the 
attention  of  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  to,  and  to  ask  him 
to  explain,  because  it  is  a fact  which  has  great  inlluence  in  my 
mind,  is  that  either  the  negroes  did  the  shooting  or  somebody 
else  did.  The  shooting  was  done. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  There  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

Mr.  FULTON.  Everybody  among  the  citizens  of  the  town, 
when  they  met  the  next  morning  and  when  they  met  immedi- 
ately after  the  occurrence,  said  it  was  the  negro  troops.  Some 
of  those  people 

Mr.  BULKELEY'.  They  naturally  were  not  going  to  charge 
themselves  witli  it. 

Mr.  FULTON.  Some  of  those  peo[)lo  had  seen  tlie  parties 
who  did  the  shooting,  and  they  told  others.  Everybody  who 
said  it  was  the  negro  troops  was  not  an  eyewitness,  but  some 
of  them  had  been.  It  is  a most  remarkable  fact  that  not  a 
single  person  in  all  that  town  pretended  to  have  seen  anybody 
else  than  negro  soldiers. 

4181G— 7738 4 


50 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I will  reach  that  at  a later  period  in  my 
discussion. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  Mr.  President 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Ohio? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

INIr.  FORAKER.  I should  like  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Ore- 
gon if  he  thinks  that  any  more  remarkable  than  that  a body 
of  ten  or  twenty  men  should  march  through  the  town  shooting 
right  and  left,  with  every  man  in  the  town  himself  armed,  with 
his  bedroom  Dill  of  rifles  and  pistols,  and  with  armed  police- 
men about,  and  that  the  marchers  should  suddenly  disappear  and 
no  human  being  be  able  to  tell  in  what  direction  they  went? 

Mr.  FULTON.  If  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  will  allow 
me 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I do  not  want  to  yield  for  any  discussion 
between  Senators. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  I only  mention  that  to  show  how  many  re- 
markable things  there  are  connected  with  this  case* 

Mr.  FULTON.  I do  not  want  to  intrench  upon  the  time  of 
the  Senator  from  Connecticut 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I am  perfectly  willing  to  answer  any  ques- 
tion ; but  if  Senators  want  to  discuss  this  question,  I wish  they 
would  discuss  it  in  their  own  time  and  not  mine. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  The  Senator  from  Connecticut  is  quite 
right. 

Mr.  FULTON.  I was  only  undertaking  to  answer  the  Sen- 
ator from  Ohio. 

Mr.  WARREN.  Will  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  yield  to 
me  for  a moment? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  With  pleasure. 

Mr.  WARREN.  Of  course  I realize  that  any  Senator  who 
rises  and  is  recognized  can  proceed,  but  I want  to  remind  the 
Senate  of  one  thing.  This  Brownsville  matter  is  not  up  regu- 
larly, nor  is  there  pending  a motion  to  take  it  up.  It  is  up  on 
the  courtesy  of  the  Senate,  extended  always  to  a Senator  vrho 
has  a prepared  speech.  The  Senator  from  Connecticut  has 
shown  an  unwillingness  to  be  interrupted  in  the  general  flow  of 
his  remarks.  I hope  he  will  be  permitted  to  proceed,  and  I 
hope  so,  because  I think  we  ought  to  get  some  of  the  appropria- 
tion bills  into  the  hands  of  conferees.  At  least  some  of  the 
members  of  the  Senate  are  involved  in  a great  many  conferences, 
and  some  of  the  conferences  are  of  a nature  that  will  take  a 
great  deal  of  time. 

Mr.  FULTON.  Mr.  President,  just  a word. 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Oregon? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  PULTON.  I was  perhaps  the  offender  in  this  instance, 
because  I asked  a question.  I only  want  to  say  that  while  I 
recognize  the  importance  of  considering  the  appropriation  bills, 
when  the  courtesy  is  extended  to  a Senator  to  make  a speech  I 
think  we  will  have  to  insist  upon  our  right  to  ask  questions  when 
there  is  something  we  want  to  have  explained. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I recognize  fully  the  propriety,  in  order  to 
meet  the  views  of  many  Senators  and  others,  of  getting  the  ap- 
propriation bills  through  the  Congress  as  rapidly  as  possible. 

4181G— 7738 


51 


But  I believe  that  the  questions  involved  in  this  discussion, 
involving  justice  to  fellow-men  and  servants  of  the  Republic, 
are  of  enough  importance  to  postpone  for  a few  minutes  or  for 
a few  hours  the  discussion  even  of  financial  measures. 

Mr.  WARREN.  Mr.  President 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I am  not  criticising  the  Senator  from 
Wyoming. 

Mr.  WARREN.  I agree  perfectly  with  the  Senator.  Only 
I think  that  he  will  agree  with  me  that  when  we  enter  into 
a general  discussion  of  this  question  we  ought  to  take  it  up 
with  that  understanding  and  go  on  with  it.  I think  he  is  right 
about  the  importance  of  it,  and  I hope  we  will  take  plenty  of 
time  before  we  get  through  to  thrash  it  out  so  that  everybody 
will  understand  it. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I have  no  doubt  we  will. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  We  will  have  plenty  of  time  to  discuss  it 
thoroughly  before  the  Congress  adjourns. 

Mr.  WARREN.  Of  course  we  will.  That  is  right,  There 
will  be  no  division  of  sentiment  on  that. 

Mr.  FORAKER.  No. 

]Mr.  BULKELEY.  Now,  these  witnesses,  whom  I have  named, 
whom  the  Government,  even,  through  the  Secretary  of  War,  has 
discredited — and  it  needed  no  words  of  mine  to  discredit  their 
testimony — with  the  policeman,  comprise  practically  all  the  so- 
called  eyewitnesses.  So  far  as  concerns  policemen  other  than 
those  already  referred  to — I think  Dominguez,  as  the  lieutenant, 
is  the  only  one  I have  referred  to — I shall  content  myself  with 
quoting  from  the  testimony  of  Captain  Kelly,  one  of  Browns- 
ville’s most  prominent  citizens,  chairman  of  the  citizens’  com- 
mittee which  conducted  the  first  investigation  of  this  affray, 
as  to  their  character  for  truth  and  veracity. 

Testimony  of  Capt.  AVilliam  Kelly,  page  25G1 : 

♦ * * * H:  * * 

Q.  Mayor  Combe  has  testified  that  Policeman  Padron  told  him  that 
he  fired  his  revolver,  down  on  Washington  street,  in  that  direction. — A. 
Yes.  As  to  Policeman  Padron,  I am  very  much  about  that  as  I am 
about  the  negroes. 

Q.  You  do  not  believe  the  policemen,  either? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Well,  I don’t  cither. 

Senator  Taliaferro.  You  agree  on  one  point,  anyway. 

By  Senator  Frazier  : 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  say  that  Padron’s  evidence  given  here  as 
detailing  the  facts  of  the  shooting  of  Dominguez  was  not  true? — A.  I 
do  not  know  ; I have  not  read  that.  I do  not  know  what  he  testified 
to.  But  I mean  the  Mexican  of  that  class  is  very  liable  to  lie,  if  he 
thinks  he  might  lie. 

By  Senator  Overman  ; 

Q.  Is  that  the  character  of  Dominguez?— A.  Very  much. 

By  Senator  Foraker: 

Q.  They  are  all  that  way,  are  they  not? — A.  Yes,  sir.  There  are 
some  of  them 

Q.  But  these  policemen,  you  think,  are  a very  shiftless  and  unre- 
liable lot? — A.  They  are  not  the  best  of  the  Mexicans,  by  a long 
W'ays. 

Q.  The  way  they  acted  would  seem  to  indicate  that.— A.  Yes ; that 
is  one  thing.  I believe  that  the  men  Mrs.  Leahy  hid  in  her  liouse,  or 
wherever  she  put  them,  were  not  tlie  only  ones  that  sought  similar 
shelter  somewhere. 

Q.  Then,  whatever  they  would  say  you  would  take  with  a good  dca! 
of  allowance? — A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  bo  very  careful  about  it?— A.  I would  certainly  consider 
whether  it  was  in  accordance  with  the  other  facts. 

4181G— 7738 


52 


By  Senator  Warner  : 

Q.  You  have  known  Dominguez  a good  while? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  lieutenant  of  police? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  lie  is  an  honest  and  truthful  man  ? — A.  Yes ; an  honest  and 
truthful  man,  and  a very  courageous  man. 

By  Senator  Taliaferro  : 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  understand  Senator  Overman’s  question  a 
while  ago,  when  he  asked  you  if  Dominguez  was  the  kind  of  a Mexican 
that  you  were  describing? — A.  No,  no.  Dominguez  is  not  like  that. 
I am  not  very  certain  about  it,  but  I think  he  is  not  a Mexican.  I 
think  his  father  was  a Greek. 

* * * * V it  * 

Pages  2552,  2553: 

* * * « ^ * 

Q.  The  testimony  shows  that  there  were  nine  or  ten  policemen  on 
cuty  that  night? — A.  Oh,  they  were  on  duty  all  over  town,  I judge. 
I do  not  know  where  they  were.  My  belief  is  that  most  of  the  Mexi- 
can police  were  in  hiding ; that  is  my  personal  belief. 

Q.  We  understand  that  two  of  them  were. — A.  That  is  my  belief. 

Q.  You  know  Mrs.  Leahy? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

CX  She  keeps  a hotel? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  We  understand  that  she  took  care  of  two  of  them. — A.  I have 
tieard  that  she  secreted  two  of  them  in  her  house  ; 5'es. 

Q.  But  that  would  leave  seven  or  eight  out  in  the  town  who  could 
bave  followed  those  men? — A.  I do  not  think  they  were  really  follov,^- 
ing  those  people. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  was  any  trouble,  when  twenty  or  thirty  of 
these  men  were  marching  through  the  streets  and  shooting  up  the 
town,  for  somebody  to  have  shot  and  killed  some  of  them?  If  they 
had  done  that,  we  would  have  had  no  trouble  at  all  in  knowing  whether 
they  were  soldiers  or  not. — A.  There  were  no  citizens  out,  as  I under- 
stand it,  until  those  soldiers  went  back  in  the  barracks. 

With  the  impeachment  of  most  of  the  witnesses  by  the  Sec- 
retary of  AVar  in  his  communication  to  the  President,  the  im- 
peachment of  the  balance  of  them,  almost  every  one,  by  the  evi- 
dence of  the  chief  citizen  of  the  town,  the  chairman  of  the  in- 
vestigating committee.  Captain  Kelly;  the  surroundings  of  the 
night  and  its  darkness;  the  poorly  lighted  streets  of  the  city, 
mostly  not  lighted  at  all,  the  evidence  is  convincing  to  me  that 
any  attempted  or  supposed  identification  of  the  soldiers,  if  sol- 
diers they  were,  was  absolutely  impossible. 

An  investigation  of  visual  observations,  or  powers  of  vision 
at  night  under  conditions  similar  to  those  in  Brownsville,  was 
conducted  by  Army  officers  at  Fort  McIntosh  (Lieutenant  Blyth, 
Lieutenant  Harbold,  Lieutenant  Wiegenstein,  and  Colonel 
Stucke).  Colonel  Stucke  was  not  an  Army  officer.  He  was 
an  engineer  ’svho  happened  at  that  time  to  be  located  in  the  vicin- 
ity of  Fort  McIntosh. 

As  a result  of  such  observations  Lieutenant  Blyth  testifies. 
Hearings,  volume  2,  pages  1990-1993 : 

Q.  Now,  go  ahead  and  describe  what  that  experiment  was. — A.  He 
arranged  to  have  the  men  go  down  there  at  night.  We  did  not  know 
how  he  was  going  to  conduct  it  at  all.  After  everything  was  ready  we 
went  out  at  about  half  past  8 in  the  evening  and  stood  on  the  edge  of 
an  arroyo.  The  men  were  down  underneath.  When  the  first  volley 
was  fired  Major  O’Neil  shouted  to  him  and  asked  him  which  way  the 
men  were  facing.  We  could  not  tell.  Lieutenant  Wiegenstein  laughed 
and  said  that  was  a part  of  the  test ; that  he  did  not  care  to  say.  He 
wanted  us  to  find  out  for  ourselves. 

Then  we  moved  down  about  50  feet  farther,  I should  say,  along  the 
edge  of  the  arroyo.  Two  more  volleys  were  fired,  and  some  fired  at 
will,  but  all  we  could  see  was  the  flash  of  the  rifle.  We  could  not  see 
the  rifle  that  fired  it. 

Q.  Have  you  any  memorandum  that  shows  the  distances  at  which 
you  w'ere  making  the  observation  ?— A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  riease  produce  the  memorandum  and  tell  us  how  far  the  squad 
was  away  from  you  when  the  first  firing  which  you  have  mentioned 
4181G— 7738 


was  done. — A.  The  first  firing  on  the  horizontal  was  50  feet  and  4 
inches,  and  the  vertical  height  was  21  feet  and  2 inches. 

Q.  That  was  which  firing,  the  second  or  the  first  V — A.  It  was  the 
first. 

Q.  You  were  that  far  distant? — A.  Yes.  sir. 

Q.  And  at  that  distance  could  you  distinguish  the  men? — A.  No.  sir. 

Q.  Could  you  tell  whether  they  were  v.^hite  men  or  negroes  or  Mexi- 
cans?— A.  The  light  was  not  sufficient  for  us  to  tell  which  way  they 
were  facing  even. 

Q.  You  could  not  even  tell  that? — A.  No.  sir. 

Q.  Could  you  tell  anything  about  the  diiferent  articles  of  clothing 
they  wore? — A.  No,  sir. 

O.  Was  there  a further  firing? — A.  Y’es,  sir. 

Q.  Where  did  that  take  place?  How  far  were  you  from  them? — 
A.  That  was  24  feet  on  the  horizontal  and  20  feet  7 inches  above  them. 
The  results  were  the  same. 

Q.  Then  there  was  another  trial  ? — A.  Yes.  sir  ; we  moved  down  then. 

Q.  You  moved  down  or  they  moved  down? — A.  We  moved  down  to 
another  place.  That  was  69  feet  2 inches  away  and  20  feet  5 inches 
above  them ; and  looking  almost  into  their  faces,  when  the  volleys 
were  fired,  all  we  could  see  was  the  flash,  that  was  all. 

Q.  You  could  not  tell  anything  about  their  faces,  you  mean? — A. 
We  could  see  nothing  but  the  flash. 

Q.  And  you  could  tell  nothing  about  their  clothes? — A.  No,  sir; 
we  could  not  even  see  the  rifles  that  were  fired. 

Q.  Y^ou  could  not  even  see  the  rifles? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Could  not  tell  whether  they  were  Krags  or  Springfields  or  Win- 
chesters or  what? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  any  other  firing,  still  another  test? — A.  Yes,  sir; 
after  that  they  marched  down  one  arroyo  and  came  up  another,  almost 
directly  underneath  us,  in  single  file,  but  we  failed  to  distinguish 
anyone,  could  not  tell  who  they  were  at  all.  They  were  halted  then 
underneath  . us,  at  that  time  20  feet  and  5 inches  below  and  18  feet 
and  7 inches  from  us.  Then  the'  flash  of  the  rifles  would  come,  and 
the  eye  would  involuntarily  close.  The  closer  it  got,  the  more  the 
noise  of  the  report  and  the  flash  of  the  rifle  attracted  your  eye. 
Before  you  could  take  your  eye  away  to  look  for  anything  else,  the 
light  would  disappear,  so  it  was  impossible  to  see  anything. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  further  tests  ? — A.  Y'es,  sir  ; we  brought  the 

men  up 

By  Senator  Foraker  : 

Q.  After  these  firings  in  the  arroyo,  what  happened  next? — A.  We 
brought  the  men  up  on  the  bank — took  them  up  on  the  road.  The 
road  was  about  8 feet  wide.  We  divided  ourselves  into  two  parties, 
one  party  on  each  side  of  the  road.  The  moon  was  shining,  and  it  was 
a clear  starlight  night,  so  there  was  a good  light.  The  men  were 
marched  past,  in  single  file,  between  us,  and  we  wanted  to  see  if  we 
could  distinguish  the  features  of  the  men.  After  they  all  passed  by 
I asked  Major  O’Neil  to  have  a number  of  white  officers  march  past,  so 
I could  get  the  exact  distance  to  us  from  them,  to  see  if  I would  get 
the  same  impression  that  I did  from  the  soldiers  going  by.  Lieutenant 
Wiogenstein  came  back  and  laughed  and  said  : “ Then  you  don’t  know 
that  there  arc  v/hite  men  in  the  line?”  I said:  “No;  I did  not  know 
that.”  So  the  detail  was  halted  and  T went  up  and  scanned  each  man’s 
face.  We  were  about  2 feet  from  them  at  that  time.  I peered  right 
into  their  faces,  and  I myself  picked  out  one  man  who  was  a little 
lighter  colored  than  the  remainder,  and  he  turned  out  to  bo  a INIoxican. 
The  other  men  1 did  not  distinguish  at  all.  After  we  had  passed  he 
told  me  that  there  was  a white  man  in  the  center  of  the  line,  and  also 
a man  who,  I believe,  was  an  Italian. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  further  experiments? — A.  That  night,  after  the 
moon  went  down,  we  went  out  and  had  the  same  experiments. 

(i.  With  the  same  results? — A.  And  with  the  same  results.  The  only 
difference  was  that  after  the  moon  went  down,  and  at  a greater  dis- 
tance— we  were  09  feet  and  2 inches  away — when  the  rifles  were  fired 
by  volley  what  I saw  was  just  a long  line  of  legs  with  dark  material. 
It  .seemed  to  be  long  trousers  that  the  men  had  on,  but  after  the  ex- 
periment was  over  and  they  were  brought  up  on  the  bank  I found  that 
they  had  on  khaki  breeches  and  loggings.  So  I received  a false  im- 
pression. 

Q.  And  you  observed  as  closely  as  you  could? — A.  Y'es,  sir;  we  cau- 
tioned one  another  to  watch.  Not  only  that,  but  after  the  first  volley 
was  fired  we  cautioned  one  another  to  watch  where  the  faces  should  be^, 

Q.  What  interest  had  Colonel  Stucke,  if  any,  in  that  investiga- 
tion?— A.  None  whatever;  no  interest  at  all.  He  was  there  as  a guest 
of  Major  O’Neil  to  dinner  and  went  out  with  us  after  dinner. 
41816—7738 


54 


Q.  He  is  not  connected  in  any  way  with  the  command? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  all  of  one  mind  as  to  the  result  of  the  investigation?— 
A.  As  far  as  it  went.  It  was  impossible  to  distinguish  features  by  the 
flash  of  a rifle,  or  to  distinguish  color  or  complexion. 

Q.  After  nightfall,  w'hen  the  firing  was  in  the  dark? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  further  experiments? — A.  We  had  another  one 
on  the  11th  of  March  at  night.  At  that  time  Captain  Lewis  and 
Lieutenant  Harbold  and  myself  were  the  observers. 

Q.  Was  that  of  this  same  general  nature? — A.  Of  the  same  nature 
as  in  the  arroyo.  After  the  firing  in  the  arroyo  we  came  up  and 
went  into  my  house,  and  went  upstairs  and  looked  out  of  two  windows, 
3 feet  away,  down,  and  the  men  were  marched  past  underneath  the 
windows,  and  we  failed  to  recognize  any  features  or  any  complexion. 
We  could  distinguish  from  the  light  shining  out  from  my  window  on 
the  first  fioor  that  they  had  on  shirts  made  of  dark  mate.rial  of  some 
kind,  and  lighter  trousers,  but  what  they  were  we  could  not  tell. 

Q.  Yes. — A.  Then  they  were  moved  around  in  front  of  the  house  and 
marched  across  the  parade  ground,  and  in  rear  of  a light,  and  when 
they  got  about  60  feet  away  we  were  unable  to  see  them.  They  dis- 
appeared entirely  from  view.  They  were  brought  back  and  marched 
between  a street  lamp  and  my  porch — we  were  all  sitting  there — the 
distance  being  about  20  paces.  We  afterwards  measured  that.  We 
did  not  recognize  anyone.  Then  they  were  brought  around,  and  right 
along  on  the  sidewalk  in  front  of  the  house,  which  is  only  5 paces 
away,  and  at  that  distance  we  failed  to  recognize  Lieutenant  Wiegen- 
steiu,  who  was  in  the  center.  We  did  not  know  he  was  there.  He  was 
the  only  white  man  in  the  lot. 

Q.  What  was  the  character  of  the  night?  Was  it  an  unusually  dark 
night? — A.  The  stars  were  shining,  and  there  was  no  moon. 

Q.  The  stars  were  shining,  and  no  moon  ? — A.  Yes,  sir  ; with  a street 
lamp  only  20  paces  away. 

Q.  Now,  if  anyone  were  to  say  that  looking  out  of  a window  of  a 
dark  night  he  or  she  saw  a gun  fired,  and  recognized  by  the  flash  of 
that  gun,  it  being  a high-power  rifle  such  as  you  have  in  use,  the  face 
of  a man  as  that  of  a negro,  and  w’as  able  to  detect  that  he  had 
freckles  on  his  face,  what  would  you  think  of  that  kind  of  a statement, 
from  your  observation  and  experience?^ — A.  I would  not  believe  it. 

Q.  Yon  would  not  believe  it? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  And  what  would  you  believe  of  a statement  of  similar  character, 
to  the  effect  that  by  the  flashes  of  rifles  it  could  be  determined  whether 
the  hats  worn  by  the  men  shooting  the  rifles  were  black  hats  or  gray 
hats,  or  whether  they  had  cords  around  them  or  not? — A.  With  our 
rifles  the  experiments  showed  that  the  flash  of  a rifle  was  not  sufficient 
to  show  you  anything. 

Q.  You  could  not  tell  what  kind  of  a rifle  it  was,  even? — A.  No,  sir; 
you  could  not  even  see  the  rifle  that  fired  the  shots. 

The  testimony  of  all  the  other  officers  engaged  in  this  investi- 
gation was  of  the  same  general  character  and  need  not  occupy 
the  time  of  'the  Senate. 

These  statements  would  justify  the  conclusions,  from  the 
character  of  the  testimony  of  at  least  one  of  the  witnesses, 
that  but  little,  if  any,  credence  can  be  given  to  the  record  tes- 
timony as  to  any  satisfactory  identification  of  soldiers  that 
night. 

THE  FIRST  SHOT. 

The  testimony  of  the  citizens  of  Brownsville,  with  exceptional 
cases,  is,  that  the  firing  was  down  in  the  direction  of  the  fort, 
and  no  attempt  is  made  to  locate  it  within  the  reservation. 
Mayor  Combe,  who  was  aroused  by  the  early  firing,  testifies. 

I was  sleeping  on  the  back  porch.  I dozed  off  and  was  not  very 
sound  asleep  when  I heard  what  I thought  to  be  four  or  five  pistol 
shots  in  a southerly  direction  from  my  home. 

This  would  be,  as  he  states  later,  in  the  direction  of  the  bar- 
racks. 

Captain  Kelly  says — and  this  testimony  is  somewhat  in  ex- 
planation of  the  character  of  the  first  firing — and  shows  to 
my  mind  conclusively  that  the  firing  heard  by  Mayor  Combe, 
that  heard  by  Captain  Kelly  and  all  citizens  of  Brownsville, 
41816—7738 


55 


was  of  siicli  a character  as  to  come  from  guns  that  were  not  in 
the  hands  of  troops.  Captain  Kelly,  pages  2528-2529,  volume 
3,  Hearings,  testifies : 

Q.  Did  you  hear  the  shooting? — A.  Oh,  yes;  very  distinctly.  I 
was  in  my  library  reading.  I got  up  and  went  to  the  front  of  th© 
house  and  lighted  a couple  of  gaslights  there  to  see  if  I could  se® 
where  it  was„  but  I was  unable  to  see  anything.  At  first  I thought 
the  shots  were  some  Mexican  procession,  possibly,  passing.  That  is 
about  the  only  shooting  we  ever  have  there. 

Q.  What  is  the  character  of  that  shooting? — A.  Well,  they  carry 
with  them  fireworks  that  they  make,  that  they  call  cuetas — a sort  of 
imitation  of  Chinese  firecrackers— and  when  they  have  a procession 
at  night — they  have  a great  many  of  them,  frequently  celebrating 
saints’  days 

Q.  A great  many  saints’  days  ? — A.  Yes,  sir  ; quite  a number  ; and 
quite  a number  of  nonsaints’  days.  They  have  anniversaries  there. 
They  celebrate  the  birthday  of  Diaz  and  the  battle  of  Pueblo,  at 
which  he  made  his  first  success,  and  all  that  sort  of  thing.  The  so- 
cieties turn  out,  and  they  fire  these  cuetas. 

Q.  You  did  not  go  out  of  your  house? — A.  No;  I did  not  go  out  at 
all. 

Q.  And  you  knew  nothing  as  to  who  were  charged  with  doing  the 
shooting  up  until  the  next  morning? — A.  No;  nothing  at  all.  I did 
not  know’  anything  about  it. 

So  that  this  shooting,  with  all  its  dangers,  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  the  cause  of  great  trouble  to  the  better  part  cer- 
tainly of  the  citizens  of  Brownsville.  Most  of  these  so-called 
“ eyewitnesses,”  after  the  five  or  ten  minutes  during  which 
this  shooting  was  going  on,  retired  quietly  to  their  homes,  as 
they  have  testified,  and  never  went  on  the  street  to  join  with 
the  lawless  mob  that  was  assembled  there  and  only  dispersed 
by  the  authorities. 

Major  Blocksom,  notes.  Senate  Document  No.  155,  page  177 : 
Notes  hy  Major  Blocksom  on  affidavits  taken  before  Captain  Lyon 
{submitted  in  Colonel  Lovering’s  report). 

When  at  Fort  Brown  I found  a number  of  men  positive  that  shots 
w'ere  fired  toward  the  post.  Their  statements  were  based  on  flashes 
from  rifles  and  sounds  of  bullets  only.  I could  find  no  evidence  of 
bullets  striking  anywhere  in  the  post  and  none  has  yet  been  given. 
My  theory  (p.  3[44]  of  my  report),  sustained  by  the  general  trend  of 
evidence  given  bj'’  soldiers  and  citizens,  is  that  first  shots  (especially 
those  toward  post)  were  fired  high  (for  effect  only  upon  the  minds  of 
men  in  the  garrison).  I heard  nothing  of  the  expression  “black  sons 

of  b etc.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  affidavits  containing  them 

were  made  by  C Company  men  a month  or  more  after  the  occurrence. 
As  far  as  known,  the-  soldiers  of  that  company  were  the  only  ones, 
wuth  one  exceptioo,  wdio  had  trouble  in  town  before  the  13th  of 
August.  Nobody  in  B Company  seems  to  have  heard  the  expression, 
though  the  quarters  were  much  nearer  the  firing  than  C Company’s. 

A.  P.  Blocksom, 

Major,  Inspector-General. 

If  Major  Blocksom’s  theory  is  correct,  it  sustains  and  gives 
a reason  why  no  marks  of  bullets  were  found  in  the  barracks  by 
IMajor  Penrose  or  any  other  ofiicer.  They  were  fired  high  in  the 
air  for  a purpose,  Mr.  President,  in  connection  with  the  lan- 
guage that  was  used  with  respect  to  this  firing  and  which  Major 
Blocksom  quotes  in  his  reiiort,  and  which  1 shall  not  venture 
to  quote  here  even  to  sustain  my  remarks. 

The.se  comments  of  Major  Blocksom  conformed  to  the  mass  of 
evidence  which  might  be  culled  from  the  testimony  to  the  effect 
that  the  first  shots  from  mixed  arms,  especially  those  toward 
the  post,  were  fired  high,  for  effect  only  ui)on  the  minds  of  the 
garrison.  I shall  content  my.self  with  inserting  here  but  a lim- 
ited amount  of  testimony  upon  this  important  point,  which  leads 
4181C — 7738 


np  to  tile  conclusion  that  the  raiders  could  be  looked  for  else- 
where than  among  the  men  of  the  garrison.  I firmly  believe  that 
these  first  shots  and  the  language  used  in  connection  therewith 
was  an  effort  to  draw  the  men  out  of  their  quarters  and  into  a 
personal  altercation  without  arms,  as  it  must  have  been  well 
known  that  they  were  securely  locked  in  the  gun  racks.  It  is 
hardly  conceivable  that  soldiers  would  have  entered  into  a con- 
spiracy to  shoot  up  the  town  and  commence  the  execution  by 
first  arousing  the  garrison  and  its  officers,  as  was  the  effect  of 
this  shooting,  and  then  escape  detection  and  punishment. 

Lieut.  Henry  S.  Grier,  who  was  the  adjutant  of- the  post, 
testifies,  Hearings,  volume  2,  page  1G99 : 

Q.  Did  you  hear  any  bullets  at  all  that  night  that  you  remember? — • 
A.  I thought  when  I was  coming  across  the  parade  ground  to  the  east 
about  up  in  front  of  the  commanding  officer’s  quarters  I heard  a scat- 
tering of  shot  on  the  ground,  but  I would  not  be  positive  about  it.  It 
might  have  been  something  else  ; some  other  noise. 

Q.  That  it  is  the  only  thing  you  heard  that  sounded  like  bullets? — A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Warner.  He  has  not  said  they  sounded  like  bullets. 

A.  I said  it  sounded  more  like  shot. 

Q.  Did  you  mean  shot  as  though A.  Yes  ; like  buckshot  from  a 

shotgun,  or  something  of  that  kind. 

Mafias  G.  Tamayo,  the  scavenger,  who  went  on  duty  every 
nigbt  about  11  o'clock,  and  wlio  was  in  tlie  best  position  of  any 
one,  for  lie  was  awake  and  performing  bis  duties  when  the 
shooting  commenced,  testifies.  Hearings,  volume  2,  pages  120G- 
1207: 

Q.  Got  down  on  the  ground  and  picked  up  a can  and  emptied  it? — 
A.  Yes,  sir  ; and  then  I set  it  on  the  ground.  I heard  the  first  shot. 

Q.  Where  was  that  tired  from  ? — A.  I think  it  was  tired  from  right 
along  this  alley  here  [indicating  on  map]. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  after  that? — A.  I heard  a lot  of  shooting. 

Q.  Then  what  did  you  do? — A.  I put  my  lantern  out  as  soon  as  I 
heard  the  first  two  shots. 

Q.  Tlien  what  did  you  do? — A.  I stood  for  a little  while  facing  the 
place  where  the  firing  was  going  on. 

Q.  Yes. — A.  And  at  the  same  time  I could  see  the  galleries,  right 
here  [indicating  on  map],  and  the  place  where  the  firing  w’as  taking 
place,  right  in  front  of  me. 

Q.  What  was  taking  place? — A.  The  firing  taking  place. 

Q.  You  are  not  pointing  to  the  town? — A.  No,  sir;  I am  not  [point- 
ing to  the  map]. 

Q.  The  firing  was  in  town? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  men  moving  about  there  before  that  first  shot 
was  fired? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  lights  about  the  barracks? — A.  No.  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  any  noise  about,  anywhere? — A.  No,  sir;  everything 
was  quiet. 

Q.  Everything  was  quiet? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  Did  you  see  any  men  moving  about  inside  the  wall  near  the  sink 
of  B Company? — A.  No,  sir. 

He  was  witliiu  25  feet  of  the  point  where  this  man  Lendall 
testifies  that,  looking  clown  Garrison  road,  unlighted,  150  feet, 
ne  saw  a body  of  men  jumping  over  the  wall.  This  man  Ta- 
mayo was  performing  his  nightly  service  and  standing  between 
the  point  where  Ivendall  was  looking  ont  of  a window  and 
within  20  or  30  feet  of  the  point  where  Kendall  saw  the  men 
jump  over  the  wall,  and  he  was  in  close  proximity  with  the  wall 
all  the  time,  stationed  between  the  barracks  and  the  wall. 

Q.  Did  you  see  anybody  jump  over  the  fence  or  the  wall  there  in 
rear  of  B Company,  opposite  the  mouth  of  Cowen  alley? — A.  No,  sir. 

O.  Or  at  any  otlier  place? — A.  No,  sir. 

If  there  had  been  any  shots  fired  from  the  upper  windows  of  B, 
C,  and  D barracks,  were  you  in  a situation  to  have  seen  them? — A.  Yes, 
4181G— 7738 


57 


sir ; I could  very  easily  have  seen  them,  because  I could  see  the  bar- 
racks here — around  right  here  in  front  of  me  [indicating  on  map]. 

Q.  Now,  were  any  shots  fired  from  the  barracks? — A.  Not  while  I 
was  there  ; no,  sir. 

Q.  How  about  the  first  shots?— A.  I heard  the  first  shots  and  then 
about  twenty  more  shots,  and  then  I drove  off. 

Q.  When  they  commenced  shooting,  then  you  left  immediately  r — ■ 
A.  I went  away  immediately. 

Q.  With  your  cart? — A.  Yes,  sir.  At  the  same  time  when  I heard 
this  first  shot  I heard  a few  bullets  going  into  the  post  over  the  ad- 
ministration building. 

Q.  That  is  important.  Which  way  were  they  going? — A.  They  went 
up  into  the  air. 

Q.  Went  up  in  the  air? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Could  you  tell  which  way? — A.  Across  that  way  [indicating  Qn 
map]. 

Pages  1208-1209 : 

Senator  Fokake'r.  Yes.  Now,  you  have  testified  before  in  this  case. 
I want  to  read  you  an  affidavit  that  was  made  on  the  14th  day  of 
August,  IbOO,  found  at  page  75  of  Senate  Document  No.  155. 

(The  affidavit  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 

Port  Brown,  State  of  Texas: 

Personally  appeared  before  me,  the  undersigned  authority,  one 
Matias  G.  Tamayo,  scavenger  at  Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  who,  being  duly 
sworn  according  to  law,  deposes  and  says  : 

“ That  at  about  12.10  a.  m.  on  the  morning  of  August  14,  1900,  he 
was  in  rear  of  the  quarters  occupied  by  Company  B,  Twenty-fifth 
Infantry  ; that  about  this  time  a shot  was  fired  by  some  person  un- 
known in  the  street  just  outside  the  wall  dividing  the  military  reserva- 
tion from  the  town  of  Brownsville,  Tex.  ; that  he  could  hear  the  bullet 
and  that  it  appeared  to  be  going  in  the  direction  of  the  Rio  Grande 
River,  about  parallel  to  the  above-mentioned  wall ; that  immediately 
following  this  one  shot  a number  of  other  shots  were  fired,  all  outside 
the  wall. 

“ lieponent  further  says  that  previous  to  the  shooting  he  saw  no 
soldiers  anywhere  in  reaV  of  the  quarters  occupied  by  the  companies 
of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  and  heard  no  talking  or  news  of  any 
kind  ; and  that  he  saw  and  heard  no  shot  or  shots  from  any  of  the 
company  barracks. 

“ Matias  G.  Tamayo, 
“Scavcnr/cr,  Fort  Broirn,  Tex.” 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me  this  14th  day  of  August,  190G. 

Samukp  P.  Lyon, 

Captain,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  Summary  Court. 

A most  rigid  examination  and  cross-examination  by  almost 
every  member  of  your  committee  failed  to  confuse  this  witness 
or  shake  the  weight  of  his  testimony.  Of  all  the  witnesses, 
he  was  the  one  that  was  awake  and  in  a position  to  see  what 
was  going  on  immediately  behind  the  wall  of  the  reservation. 
He  was  a Brownsville  boy,  and  had  but  little  time  to  interest 
himself  with  the  members  of  the  battalion  during  their  two 
weeks  at  Fort  Brown. 

James  II.  Howard,  Senate  Document  No.  155,  pages  74-75  and 
1G9: 

Fort  Brown,  Tkx,  August  V,,  1906. 

Fort  Brown,  State  of  Texas: 

I’ersonally  appeared  before  me  the  undersigned  authority.  Private 
.T.  II.  Howard,  Company  1),  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  who,  being  duly 
sworn  according  to  law,  deposes  and  says  : 

“I  was  a member  of  the  post  guard  on  the  night  of  the  1.1th  and 
14th  of  August,  190G,  I was  posted  as  a sentinel  on  post  No.  2.  which 
extends  around  the  barracks,  keeping  the  buildings  on  my  left,  at 
10.50  p.  ra.,  August  15.  At  about  12.10  on  the  morning  of  the  14th, 
when  between  C and  I)  Company  barracks,  I heard  a single  shot,  then 
five  or  six,  and  then  a regular  fusilade.  The  shots  seemed  to  come 
from  the  street  in  the  rear  of  tlie  brick  wall  back  of  B Company’s 
barracks.  I thought  they  were  shooting  at  me,  and  I looked  in  the 
direction  of  the  sounds  to  see  if  I could  see  anybody,  but  I could  not, 
and  then  I went  to  the  front  of  the  barracks  and  gave  the  alarm,  by 
4181G— 7738 


58 


firing  my  piece  three  times  and  calling  for  the  guard.  I did  not  see 
anybody  at  all  hut  the  post  scavenger,  who  was  at  the  sinks  in  the 
rear  of  B Company’s  barracks.  As  soon  as  the  shooting  commenced 
he  drove  away  with  his  cart. 

“ Joseph  H.  Howard, 

^‘Private,  Company  D,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry.” 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me  this  20th  day  of  August,  1906. 

Samuel  P.  Lyon, 

Captain,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  Trial  Offieer,  f^ummary  Court. 


Fort  Brown,  State  of  Texas,  ss: 

Personally  appeared  before  me,  the  undersigned  authority,  one  Joseph 
H.  Howard,  private,  of  Company  D,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  who,  being 
duly  sworn  according  to  law,  deposes  and  says  : 

“About  12  midnight,  Monday.  August  13,  1906,  I was  a sentinel  on 
guard  on  post  No.  2,  which  extends  completely  around  the  four  bar- 
racks. The  first  thing  that  occurred  that  was  unusual  was  a shot  fired 
in  the  road  opposite  where  T was  at  the  time,  on  my  post  opposite  the 
interval  between  B and  C Company  quarters.  Several  other  shots 
followed  in  quick  succession,  and  after  a short  interval  what  sounded 
like  a fusillade  of  shots.  My  first  impression  was  that  I was  being 
fired  upon.  I shouted  the  alarm  after  I had  looked  in  that  direction 
and  had  been  unable  to  see  anything.  Then  I ran  to  the  front  of  the 
barracks,  passing  between  B and  C Company  quarters,  and  there  stayed 
until  the  companies  had  formed,  when  I returned  to  that  portion  of 
m.y  post.  I did  not  see  anyone  cross  my  post  except  men  going  to  and 
from  the  closets  before  taps.  After  the  shooting  men  were  stationed 
along  the  wall  alongside  of  my  post.  At  the  time  of  the  shooting  the 
scavenger  was  at  work  at  the  closets  along  the  wall.  I do  not  know 
who  did  the  shooting.  The  reports  sounded  like  rifle  shots  to  me.  I 
should  judge  about  fifty  or  more  shots  were  fired. 

“ Further  deponent  saith  not. 

“ Joseph  H.  Howard, 

‘^Private,  Company  D,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry.” 

Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  at  F'ort  Brown,  Tex.,  this  20th 
day  of  August,  1906. 

Samuel  B.  Lyon, 

Captain,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  Trial  Offieer,  Summary  Court. 


Howard  was  the  sentry  and,  when  the  shooting  commenced, 
fired  the  alarm  from  his  rifle  and  called  for  the  corporal  of  the 
guard.  All  the  flashes  of  guns  which  witnesses  have  testified 
as  being  within  the  walls  of  the  reservation  I think  can  readily 
be  attributed  to  the  firing  of  these  signal  guns  in  the  air  by  the 
witness  Howard,  who  was  on  guard  at  his  post  on  his  own  beat 
at  that  hour  and  who  performed  his  duty  by  discharging  a 
signal  of  distress,  recognized  almost  everywhere,  and  calling 
for  the  corporal  of  the  guard. 

IMingo  Saunders,  with  a service  in  the  Army  of  twenty-five 
years  or  thereabouts,  testifies  to  the  same  effect.  He  was 
allowed,  on  account  of  his  long  service,  to  sleep  out  of  quarters, 
but  within  the  reservation,  and  he  testifies  that  in  proceeding 
toward  the  fort  the  bullets  were  whizzing  over  his  head. 

Sergt.  J.  R.  Reid,  Senate  Document  No.  155,  page  75 : 


Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  August  23,  J906. 

Sergt.  .1.  R.  Reid,  Company  B,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  stated  to  me 
chat  he  did  not  have  the  call  to  arms  sounded  (he  was  sergeant  of  the 
guard  on  the  night  of  the  13th  of  August)  until  the  shots  came  so  fast 
that  he  thought  post  was  attacked.  He  stated  also  that  he  formed  the 
guard  before  having  the  call  sounded. 

A.  P.  Blocksom. 

Major,  Inspeetor-General. 


Charles  E.  Rudy,  Senate  Document  No.  155,  page  lG-1 : 
l*ersonal!y  appeared  before  me  the  undersigned  authority,  one  Cliarles 
E.  Rudy,  an  artificer  of  Company  C.  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  who,  being 
dnlv  sworn  according  to  law.  deposes  and  says  as  follows  : 

'^That  he  was  asleep  on  the  front  porch  of  his  company  quarters  at 
Fort  Brown,  Tex.,  on  the  night  of  August  1.3-14,  190(>,  when  he  was 
awakened  about  12  o’clock  by  a shot.  That  this  first  shot  seemed  to 
41816—7738 


50 


come  from  the  direction  of  Brownsville,  and  that  right  after  that  shot 
a number  of  shots  were  fired  very  rapidly  near  where  the  first  shot  was 
fired.  That  he  got  up  and  went  into  the  quarters,  and  that  by  the  time 
he  got  inside  the  quarters  “ call  to  arms  ” had  sounded,  and  he  went  to 
the  gun  rack  to  get  his  gun,  but  he  found  the  gun  rack  locked  and 
went  to  the  back  door  and  looked  out  to  see  if  he  could  see  the  shoot- 
ing, and  saw  the  fiash  of  a number  of  guns  which  were  being  fired 
from  along  the  wall  which  separates  Fort  Brown  from  Brownsville,  and 
that  it  looked  as  though  they  were  being  fired  on  the  outside  of  the 
wall.  It  was  so  dark  that  he  could  not  see  who  was  firing,  but  from 
the  flashes  it  looked  as  though  about  twenty-five  or  thirty  people  were 
firing.  From  the  direction  of  the  flashes  it  looked  as  though  the  par- 
ties firing  were  firing  in  the  direction  of  B Company’s  quarters,  and 
high.  That  as  the  shooting  continued  he  heard  cursing  and  calls  of 

‘ Come  out,  you  black  sons  of  b , and  v/e  will  kill  all  of  you,’ 

from  where  the  shooting  was  going  on.  That  he  left  the  door  and 
went  to  get  his  rifle  and  fall  in  with  the  company  outside  of  the 
quarters,  and  saw  no  more  of  the  shooting.  That  he  does  not  know  who 
did  this  shooting.  * 

“And  further  the  deponent  saith  not. 

“ Chaule.s  E.  Rudy^ 
^‘Company  C,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry.’’ 

Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me  at  Fort  Reno,  Okla.,  this  12th 
day  of  September,  1900. 

Samuel  P.  LTO^r, 

Captain,  Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  Summary  Court. 

This  quoted  testimony  and  a voliiine  more  which  would  be 
merely  ciunnlative  form  the  basis  of  Major  Blocksom’s  report. 

The  failure  to  get  the  troops  outside  of  the  reservation  com- 
pelled the  raiders  to  pursue  their  murderous  work  through  the 
town  if  their  plot  to  get  rid  of  the  soldiers  was  to  prove  suc- 
cessful. It  is  a remarkable  fact  that,  with  an  armed  police 
force  scattered  through  the  town,  no  concerted  effort  was  made 
to  interfere,  pursue,  or  follow  this  band  of  outlaws.  If  I were 
to  trace  these  outlaws  to  their  hiding — and  I call  the  attention 
of  the  Senator  from  Oregon  [Mr.  Fulton]  to  my  statement 
now,  because  I think  it  answers  his  remark — I should  seek  them 
in  the  crowd  of  armed  men  that  assembled  with  the  police  on 
Elizabeth  street  immediately  the  shooting  ceased,  looking  for 
a leader  to  make  a further  attack  on  the  fort,  and  were  only 
dispersed  l)y  the  earnest  appeals  of  Mayor  Combe. 

.Air.  FULTON.  Air.  President 

The  VICE-PIiESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Oregon? 

Air.  lUJLKELEY.  Certainly. 

Air.  FULTON.  If  it  be  true  that  they  were  there  looking  for  a 
leader,  making  an  attack  on  the  fort,  the  Senator  can  not  cer- 
tainly insist  that  they  had  previously  organized  and  attacked 
the  town,  because  they  were  disorganized,  looking  for  a leader 
to  attack  the  fort. 

A\diy  attack  the  fort  if  somebody  in  the  fort  had  not  attacked 
them,  and  why  were  they  looking  for  a leader  to  do  it? 

Air.  BULKELEY.  As  a part  of  the  conspiracy  to  drive  this 
garrison  away  from  Brownsville. 

Air.  FULTON.  If  there  had  been  a conspiracy,  surely  there 
would  have  been  an  organization,  and  with  the  organization 
there  would  have  been  leadership.  The  Senator  says  they  were 
there  looking  for  somebody  to  lead  them. 

Air.  BULKELEY.  I have  assumed  that  of  the  2n0  or  200 
men  who  assembled  on  Elizabeth  street  these  raiders  composed 
but  a .small  part  of  that  crowd.  It  is  not  claimed  by  anybody 
that  they  exceeded  either  ten  or  fifteen  in  number. 

4181G— 7738 


GO 


INIr.  FULTON.  Nevertheless,  I submit  if  those  people  had 
previously  organized  and  were  in  a conspiracy  they  had  leaders, 
and  had  the  mob  desired  a leader  they  would  have  led,  because 
they  were  organized.  I submit  the  Senator  will  have  to  find  a 
better  explanation  than  that  to  show  that  a mob  had  gathered 
there  and  they  were  those  who  had  done  the  shooting. 

Mr.  LODOE.  There  is  no  evidence  of  it. 

IMr.  BULKELEY.  There  is  no  evidence,  I admit.  I said 
I would  look  for  their  hiding  place  among  this  crowd  of 
men  who  were  appealing  for  a leader  to  take  them  down  and 
assail  the  fort.  I refer  to  the  tcbtimony  of  the  mayor  on  that 
point.  He  said,  Hearings,  volume  3,  page  2386 : 

Everybody  was  clamoriug  and  standing  around  there  with,  these 
guns,  and  saying,  “ Let's  go  down  to  the  post,”  and,  “ Let’s  go  down 
and  do  those  fellows  up.”  I don’t  remember  the  exact  language 
they  used,  in  the  excitement  of  the  moment,  and  I saw  that  the  ex- 
citement was  getting  intense,  and  Judge  Parks  was  standing  to  my 
left,  and  I said,  “ Get  me  a box  or  something  to  stand  on,”  and  they 
brought  mo,  I do  not  remember  whether  it  was  a box  or  a barrel,  and  I 
got  up  and  I appealed  to  the  people,  first,  as  an  ex-Army  officer,  and  I 
told  them,  “ I have  served  with  those  troops  and  I know  them  to  be  as 
efficient  troops  as  there  are  in  the  world.  They  are  splendidly  armed, 
and  if  you  go  down  there  many  a valuable  life  will  be  lost.” 

And  I tbiuk  that  was  true.  Mayor  Combe  proceeds: 

” Besides  that,  you  are  within  the  law'.  Remain  so,  and  we  will  get  jus- 
tice.” I spoke  in  that  strain  for  a few  minutes.  Then  I told  them  that 
as  mayor  of  the  city  I w'ould  arrest  any  man  that  remained  on  the  street. 
I then  w'ent  to  several  of  the  most  prominent  citizens  there,  bank 
cashiers  and  bank  directors  and  county  clerks,  and  so  on,  and  I said, 
“ Gentlemen,  you  will  assist  me  in  dispersing  these  people  here  ; ” and  in 
groups  we  got  them  away  ; very  reluctantly,  but  they  got  aw’ay.  There 
remained  on  the  streets  the  police  officers  and  several  of  the  citizens 
whom  I requested  to  remain.  I told  them  to  arm  themselves,  if  they 
v/ere  not  armed. 

This  proposed  attiick  upon  the  post  by  these  citizens  con- 
forms entirely  to  my  theory  that  the  post  was  originally  at- 
tacked for  the  piir])ose  of  drawing  the  troops  out  unarmed, 
and  when  that  failed  these  desperadoes,  as  they  had  grown  to 
be  in  their  murderous  career,  were  seeking  to  attack  the  post 
as  the  only  remedy. 

This  is  entirely  in  accord  with  the  views  of  Major  Penrose, 
who  immediately  assembled  his  command  and  placed  his  whole 
battalion  in  iiosition  to  defend  the  post. 

In  this  connection,  I would  say  that  the  first  gun,  and  the 
only  gun,  identified  in  the  hands  of  a citizen,  who  was  alfout  to 
enter  Crixell’s  saloon,  was  a Winchester,  which  the  mayor 
found — as  he  advanced  down  Elizabeth  street — in  front  of  Crix- 
elTs  saloon  or  gambling  house.  The  mayor,  evidently  dis- 
turbed, exclaimed,  “What  are  you  doing  with  that  gun?'’  and 
took  it  away  from  him  and  did  not  wait  for  any  talk  at  all. 

Hearings,  volume  33,  page  2384  : 

* * * A.  * * * I wont  on  down  tho  .street,  and  when  I got 

opposite  Crixell’s  saloon  I saw  a man  about  to  go  into  the  saloon  with  a 
gun  in  his  hand.  I afterwards  found  it  to  be  an  old  Winchester  rifle. 

By  Senator  Warner  : 

Q.  The  shooting  was  all  over  by  this  time? — A.  The  shooting  was 
over;  yes,  sir.  I halted  him.  I knew  the  man.  Ills  name  was  Jose 
Garza,  or  Tamayo,  or  something  of  the  kind.  I know  him  very  well. 
He  sometimes  has  acted  as  a special  policeman.  I halted  him,  and  he 
stopped,  and  I said,  ‘‘What  are  you  doing  with  that  gun?”  And  I 
took  it  away  from  him.  I did  not  wait  for  any  talk  at  all,  and  I said, 
“ Get  in  there,”  and  I put  him  in  the  saloon,  and  Mr.  Crixell  said, 
“ That  is  my  rifle.”  That  is  Crixell.  the  saloon  keeper.  So  I gave  the 
gun  to  him.  They  attempted  to  work  the  mechanism,  and  it  would 
4181G— 7738 


61 


not  work,  while  I was  standing  there,  right  in  the  saloon.  As  I 
walked  into  the  saloon  there  was  a chorus  of  remarks,  such  as  “ Mr. 
Mayor,  the  negroes  are  shooting  on  the  town.” 

I can  readily  identify  this  party  as  one  of  the  raiders  seek- 
ing shelter  in  the  saloon  or  gambling  house  where  he  would 
be  welcome  and  from  which  the  soldiers  had  been  excluded. 
The  possibilities  are  great  that  this  gun  was  the  one  described 
by  Mrs.  Leahy,  which  seemed  to  her  keen  vision  to  be  out  of 
order  when  the  firing  was  going  on  in  the  vicinity  of  Cowen 
alley  and  Fourteenth  street.  This  gun  was  owned  by  Crixell,  or 
claimed  to  be,  and  I fail  to  find  any  reason  for  its  being  on  the 
street  in  the  hands  of  another  person. 

The  honorable  Senator  from  Idaho  [Mr.  Borah]  has  inti- 
mated that  the  love  of  the  soldier  for  his  “ pass,”  and  their 
deprivation  of  the  same,  was  one  of  the  causes  that  led  up  to 
the  affray;  but  I submit,  Mr.  President,  that  durmg  their  two 
weeks’  stay  in  Brownsville  they  had  not  been  deprived  of  this 
highly  esteemed  convenience;  it  was  not  until  after  5 o’clock 
of  the  afternoon  of  the  13th  that  any  order  was  issued  discon- 
tinuing or  revoking  passes,  and  this,  at  the  earnest  request  of 
Mayor  Combe,  whose  testimony  on  that  point  I quote.  And 
this  was  on  the  afternoon  before  the  “ shooting  up  ” of  the 
town. 

Mayor  Combe  testifies,  volume  3,  page  2382,  Hearings; 

I then  said  to  him,  in  the  presence  of  Mr.  Evans,  “ Major  Penrose, 
this  is  a terrible  affair.  The  people  in  town  are  very  much  incensed 
and  excited,  and  I protest  against  any  of  your  officers  or  men  I do 
not  remember  now  whether  I said  “ officers,”  but  positively  I said  his 
men — “ going  into  town  to-night.”  Then  I made  use  of  one  or  the  other 
of  these  expressions,  “ Major,  if  you  allow  these  men  to  go  into  town 
to-night,  I will  not  be  responsible  for  their  lives,”  or  ” Major,  do  not 
allow  your  men  to  go  out  of  the  post,  because  there  is  a great  deal  of 
danger  in  town.”  One  or  the  other  of  these  expressions  I used — I am 
not  sure  w’hich. 

Aud  agaiu,  in  reply  to  an  inquiry.  Mayor  Combe  says.  Hear- 
ings, volume  3,  page  2387 : 

“ The  citizens  are  very  much  excited,  and  this  is  terrible,”  or  some- 
thing to  that  effect.  He  said,  ” Major  Combe,  1 can  not  believe  it.  It 
has  been  reported  to  me  that  the  citizens  have  fired  on  the  post.”  I 
said,  ” No,  sir  ; that  is  not  so.”  We  were  in  conversation  some  little 
while ; I do  not  remember  the  details  now.  I said  to  him,  ‘‘  Major 
Penrose,  you  will  have  to  keep  your  officers  and  men  in  the  post.  They 
can  not  come  into  town  under  any  circumstances,  and  I hope  that  you 
will  issue  that  order,  because  the  people  are  very  much  excited  and 
very  much  enraged,  and  if  any  of  your  men^come  in,  why,  it  is  danger- 
ous ” — or,  I do  not  remember  whether  I used  that  expression — ” I will 
not  answer  for  their  lives.”  At  any  rate,  I impi*essed  upon  him 
strongly  that  it  would  be  dangerous  for  his  officers  and  men  to  go  into 
the  town.  He  said  to  me,  “ Major  Combe,  I shall  certainl}’’  cooperate 
with  you  in  this  respect.  I shall  issue  an  order  that  none  of  my  offi- 
cers or  men  shall  go  into  the  town.” 

GUNS,  CAP,  SHELLS,  ETC. 

The  articles  picked  up  in  the  streets  of  Brownsville  appear  to 
have  constituted,  in  connection  with  the  so-called  identification 
by  eyewitnesses,  the  most  incriminating  evidence  against  the 
soldiers,  and  these  two  items  of  evidence  appear  to  have  been 
the  basis  of  the  changed  opinion  formed  by  Major  Penrose, 
who,  up  to  the  time  of  the  appearance  of  Mayor  Combe  with 
these  exhibits,  had  persisted  that  the  attack  was  made  upon 
his  command  and  the  post,  which  I have  before  stated  he 
prepared  to  defend. 

It  is  claimed  that  these  shells — almost  universally  exploded 
cartridges — were  picked  up  in  the  streets  of  the  city  in  the 
4181G— 7738 


62 


early  morning  after  the  affray,  as  well  as  clips,  bandoliers, 
and  a cap  belonging  to  a member  of  the  battalion,  which  cap, 
although  bearing  the  initial  of  the  soldier  and  thus  readily 
traced  to  its  owner,  suddenly  disappeared  as  a factor  after  the 
investigation  by  the  citizens’  committee,  before  whom  it  was 
produced.  It  was  readily  proved  that  this  was  of  that  class 
of  articles  that  had  been  disposed  of  or  thrown  away  and  ap- 
propriated by  the  Mexican  scavengers,  as  heretofore  testified 
by  large  numbers  of  the  soldiers.  Its  appearance  on  the  streets 
at  this  opportune  time  and  its  early  use  as  evidence,  as  well  as 
its  immediate  elimination,  are,  to  my  mind,  strong  evidence  of 
the  well-conceived  conspiracy,  and  a part  of  it,  to  compel  the 
removal  of  the  colored  troops  from  that  locality.  I append 
here  the  testimony  of  Charles  W.  Askew,  the  reputed  owner  of 
the  cap,  and  which  was  marked  with  his  initials. 

Hearings,  volume  1,  page  560 : 

Q.  Captain  McDonald? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  do  j^ou  know  it  was  by  his  suggestion? — A.  He  sent  me 
up  there  one  day. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  it  was  hy  his  suggestion? — A.  He  sent  me 
up  there  one  day,  and  I had  some  caps,  and  Captain  Macklin  sent  me 
up  there  to  the"  administration  building,  and  he  asked  me  how  many 
caps  I had  drawn  since  I had  been  in  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry. 

Q.  How  many  caps  you  had  drawn?- — A.  Yes,  sir.  I think  they 
found  a cap  downtown  with  my  initials  in  it. 

Q.  With  C.  W.  A.,  isn’t  it?— A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  found  that  down  the  street? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

O.  And  you  think  that  is  what  led  to  your  arrest? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Tell  us  all  about  that  cap.  Tell  us  anything  you  may  have  to  say 
about  that. — A.  I gave  the  first  sergeant  one  of  my  old  caps  when  I 
was  at  Fort  Niobrara,  and  there  was  a box  of  old  caps  that  was  shipped 
down  to  Fort  Brown,  and  when  they  got  down  there  they  opened  that 
box  of  old  caps,  and  some  of  those  muchachos,  I suppose,  found  them 
and  got  them  and  carried  them  away  ; and  I thii^k  that  is  the  way  they 
got  that  cap. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  cap? — A.  No,  sir;  I never  saw 
the  cap. 

The  shells  and  bandoliers  still  remain  to  be  accounted  for. 
It  is  in  evidence,  and  unchallenged,  that  a box  of  exploded 
shells,  etc.,  was  brought  down  from  Fort  Niobrara  and  was  de- 
posited upon  the  back  porch  of  the  barracks  of  B Company, 
where  they  were  open  to  the  careful  search  and  appropriation 
by  anyone,  as  testified  to  by  Sergt.  Mingo  Sanders. 

It  is  imcontradicted  that  such  a box  was  brought  and  opened 
and  exposed,  and  finally  a guard  put  on  it  to  protect  it  from 
further  depredation. 

Hearings,  volume  1,  page  300-301 : 

Q.  You  had  about  1,G00  shells  that  you  put  in  boxes? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  took  to  Brownsvilie  because  they  had  not  been  decapped? — 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  put  those  out  on  the  back  porch  after  you  got  there? — 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  see  that  box  there? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  the  box  open? — A.  Yes,  sir;  the  box  was  open,  on  the  back 
porch. 

Q.  And  could  anybody  have  taken  shells  out  of  that  box? — A.  Yes, 
sir ; anybody  that  wanted  to,  because  they  were  compelled — -because 
the  Mexicans  was  so  bad  down  there,  picking  up  clothing  and  every- 
thing that  was  on  the  porch,  or  anything  else  that  was  around  there, 
until  the  commanding  officer  issued  an  order  to  put  on  that  post — to 
not  allow  people  to  pick  up  and  carry  away  things  that  didn’t  belong 
to  them. 

Q.  That  was  the  reason  why  that  guard  was  put  on  there? — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  And  that  was  some  days  after  your  arrival  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

4181G— 7738 


Q.  Because  the  Mexicans  were  running  in  and  picking  up  everything 
they  could? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  see  them  pick  up  — A.  Caps,  clothing,  shoes,  and 
these  arctic  overshoes,  and  blouses,  and  trousers,  and  everything  else. 
They  would  pick  up  everything,  whether  it  was  serviceable  or  not. 

Q.  All  the  old  cans  you  would  throw  out  and  everything  else — they 
would  pick  up? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

s;:  * * * * 

Q.  But  you  heard  these  halls  going  overhead — you  have  been  in 
battle,  have  you  ? — A.  Y"es,  sir  ; I have  ; a good  deal. 

Q.  You  were  at  El  Caney? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  At  Santiago? — A.  Y'es,  sir. 

Q.  And  in  the  Philippines? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  were  in  engagements  in  all  those  places? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  you  have  heard  a good  deal  of  firing,  and  you  have  also  heard 
a good  deal  of  firing  on  the  target  range? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  the  committee  whether  that  was  what  I will  call 
mixed  firing,  with  different  arms,  or  whether  the  firing  was  all  with 
the  same  kind  of  arm  ? — A.  It  was  mixed  arms.  I suppose  there  were 
six-shooters  and  Winchesters  and  all  calibers,  and  there  may  have 
been  some  Mausers  in  it,  because  it  has  a keen  sound.  A Winchester 
has  a very  broad  sound,  like  something  very  loud. 

Q.  What  kind  of  a noise  did  those  balls  make  that  went  over  your 
head  while  you  were  lying  down? — A.  They  made  a kind  of  flat 
noise.  It  is  a kind  of  experience  that  a man  must  more  or  less  have 
himself  that  has  been  under  fire.  The  Krag  bullet  and  the  Mauser 
bullet,  too,  makes  a kind  of  whiz.  It  goes  “ the-ee-ew,” — something 
of  that  kind  [witness  imitating  sound]. 

Senator  Fokakee.  I am  afraid  the  stenographer  can  not  get  that 
down. 

By  Senator  Foraker  : 

Q.  It  makes  a keen  sound? — A.  Yes,  sir;  and  you  can’t  tell  whether 
the  gun  is  in  a tree  or  on  the  ground,  or  close  to  you  or  far  from  you. 
But  these  other  guns  go  “ boo-oo,”  something  like  that  [indicating 
sound],  what  we  in  our  way  of  determining  call  a blunderbuss;  and 
that’s  the  way  those  guns  sound — a loud  noise. 

Q.  Did  that  firing  sound  to  you  like  it  was  firing  from  a Springfield 
rifle,  such  as  you  had  at  that  time? — A.  No,  sir. 

Tlie  careful  examination  by  Captain  Macklin,  detailed  by 
Major  Penrose  to  seek  in  the  Garrison  road  and  vicinity  for 
any  evidence  to  fix  the  guilt  upon  participants  in  the  affray, 
disclosed  this  remarkable  finding,  and  goes  far  to  establish  the 
distribution  of  exploded  shells  upon  the  streets — obtained  in 
the  way  described  by  Sergeant  Saunders — of  the  conspiracy  to 
fix  the  shooting  up  of  the  town  upon  the  garrison.  I ask  your 
close  attention  to  the  testimony  of  Captain  Macklin  in  regard 
to  the  finding  of  the  “ bunch  ” of  shells  and  clips,  for  the  rea- 
son that  it  conforms  absolutely  to  the  theory  that  I have 
formed,  that  it  -would  be  impossible  for  cartridges  fired  from 
high-po-wer  guns  by  a body  of  moving  troops,  the  exploded  shells 
ejected  from  the  magazine  to  fall  in  such  a position  as  the 
captain  found  these  shells  and  clips — seven  clips,  each  ordi- 
narily containing  five  shells,  and  but  six  exploded  shells — 
which,  after  the  rapid  firing  described  by  many  witnesses,  wmuld 
hardly  be  a fair  proportion  of  either  class.  It  is  also  a re- 
markable coincidence  that,  so  far  as  I recall  the  evidence  or 
have  been  able  to  examine  it,  these  shells  and  clips  are  all  that 
have  been  reported  as  found  between  the  Cowen  house,  at 
Fourteenth  street,  and  the  Garrison  road,  or  Fifteenth  street, 
where  the  first  and  a considerable  part  of  the  firing  took  place. 

Without  reading  the  testimony  I will  state  in  a general  way 
that  clips  and  shells,  five  or  six  of  one  and  seven  of  the  other, 
were  found  in  a place  about  10  inches  in  diameter.  It  is  the 
testimony  of  Army  otticers  who  appeared  before  us,  and  it  is 
the  uncontradicted  opinion  of  Army  oliicers  everywhere  with 
whom  I have  been  able  to  di.scuss  these  (luestions,  that  it  is 
4181G— 7738  * 


64 


absolutely  impossible  that  shells  and  clips  fired  from  a high- 
power  rifle  and  ejected  therefrom,  as  they  must  be  after  each 
shell  is  fired,  could  have  landed  iu  any  such  position,  and  the 
only  reasonable  conclusion  that  can  be  reached  is  that  that 
“ bunch  ” of  shells  in  that  narrow  space  was  placed  there  and 
never  fired  from  any  rifle  whatever  that  night. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Were  there  any  soldiers'  caps 
found  there  ? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  No;  but  I described  one  cap  and  I gave 
the  information  in  regard  to  the  cap.  It  was  found  and  elim- 
inated at  once,  because  it  was  shown  to  be  of  that  character  of 
goods  that  had  been  thrown  away  by  the  soldiers  and  discarded 
by  them,  and  when  the  soldier  himself  vras  brought  by-  order  of 
Captain  2»IcDonald  before  the  committee,  his  testimony  was 
credited  and  the  cap  and  all  disappeared. 

Captain  Macklin  in  his  testimony  says,  in  a few  words,  they 
were  all  in  a “ bunch  ” not  over  10  or  12  inches  in  diameter. 

Mr.  PILES.  Was  the  cap  found  in  that  bunch. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  No;  the  cap  was  found  in  another  place 
on  the  Garrison  road.  It  was  found  on  the  Garrison  road  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Jefferson  street. 

Captain  Mackiin,  Hearings,  volume  2,  pages  1776-1778 : 

Q.  Light  enough  to  inspect? — A.  Yes,  sii\ 

Q.  State,  now,  whether  or  not  before  you  started  to  inspect  you  made 
any  investigations  either  inside  or  outside  the  wall  of  the  reservation, 
to  see  what  you  could  find,  if  anything  at  all,  as  a result  of  the 
firing. — A.  Yes,  sir  ; after  I went  on  guard  my  station  was  at  the  main 
gate.  I had  there  two  noncommissioned  officers  and  six  men,  and 
during  the  night  I stayed  there  except  the  times  that  I went  away  to 
make  inspections.  Just  as  soon  as  the  streak  of  dawn  came  I walked 
up  and  down  inside  of  the  wall,  looking  for  shells.  Then  I went  out- 
side of  the  gate  and  went  over  as  far  as  the  telegraph  office 

Q.  Before  you  go  outside,  tell  us  whether  or  not  you  found  any 
shells  or  anything  else  inside. — A.  No,  sir ; I did  not  find  anything 
inside.  I went  all  along  the  line  there  inside  and  did  not  find  any- 
thing. Then  I went  outside,  over  as  far  as  the  telegraph  office,  which 
is  on  the  corner  of  Elizabeth  street  and  right  opposite  the  gate.  I did 
not  see  anything  at  all,  and  then  walked  down  outside  of  the  wall 
toward  the  alley,  which  is  directly  in  the  rear,  or  almost  directly  ia 
rear,  of  B Company  quarters.  Right  there  at  the  mouth  of  the  alley 
I found  six  clips,  I think  it  was,  and  seven  shells,  or  approximately 
that. 

Q.  Six  clips  and  seven  shells? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  they  exploded  shells? — A.  Y'es,  sir. 

Q.  They  were  the  shells  of  cartridges  that  had  been  fired? — A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  they  were  of  the  Springfield  rifle? — A.  Yes,  sir;  the  Spring- 
field  rifle. 

Q.  And  the  clips  were  the  same? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  had  no  clips  with  the  Krag- Jorgenson  at  all,  had  you? — A. 
No.  sir. 

Q.  Now,  you  found  six  clips  and  seven  shells? — A.  Yes,  sir;  I think 
that  is  the  number  ; I don’t  recollect. 

Q.  One  clip  accommodates  how  many  cartridges  or  shells? — A.  Five. 

Q.  They  were  hardly  in  proportion.  Then? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  tell  us  in  what  position  on  the  ground — you  found  these  on 
the  ground,  did  you  ? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  what  position  did  you  find  these  clips  and  shells  with  refer- 
ence to  each  other,  and  indicate  on  the  map  just  as  nearly  as  you  can 
where  you  found  them  ; the  exact  spot.  You  can  see  the  alley  indicated 
there. — A.  Just  about  in  that  position  [indicating]. 

Q.  You  point  to  the  center  of  the  alley  on  the  town  side  of  Fifteenth 
street. — A.  I have  forgotten  the  width  of  that  alley,  but  I think  it  was 
IG  feet,  and  they  were  just  about  in  the  middle  of  the  alley. 

Q.  And  they  were  on  the  town  side  of  the  street  that  runs  along 
parallel  with  the  wall  and  outside  of  it? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

By  Senator  Oveumax  ; 

Q.  How  far  from  the  wall?— A.  I should  say  about  G or  8 feet — 
about  8 feet,  about  half  way.  • 

4181G— 7738 


65 


By  Senator  Forakbr  : 

Q.  The  road  there  is  30  feet  wide,  as  I understand  it? — A.  Not  that 
distance  ; no,  sir ; I think  it  is  16. 

Q.  No ; the  road  is  shown  on  the  map  to  he  30  feet  wide.  It  is 
marked  an  inch  wide,  and  the  map  is  drawn  to  a scale  of  30  feet  to 
the  inch. — A.  Very  well. 

Q.  Did  you  find  these  shells  in  the  mouth  of  the  alley  or  did  you 
find  them  in  the  road? — A.  I found  them  right  in  the  mouth  of  the 
alley,  looking  up  the  alley — you  could  see  up  the  alley — and  when  I 
picked  up  the  shells  I stood  over  them,  because  there"  were  a lot  of 
people  up  the  road  and  they  were  looking  down  tovraid  the  alley. 
There  was  a great  crowd  congregated  about.  I spread  out  my  feet 
and  stooped  down  over  the  shells  and  picked  them  up,  and  they  were 
in  a space  not  over  that  large  [indicating].  They  were  all  in  a bunch. 

Q.  You  indicate  a space  circular  in  form  and  about  how  large  in 
diametei-? — A.  Well,  not  over  10  inches,  sir;  10  or  12  inches  in  diam- 
eter. 

Q.  Ten  inches  in  diameter.  I notice  that  in  your  testimony  before 
the  court-martial  you  said  a space  with  a radius"  of  not  more  than  12 
to  lo  inches.  Did  you  mean  radius  or  did  you  mean  diameter? — A.  I 
meant  diameter,  sir. 

Q.  You  want  to  correct  that  statement  as  you  now  make  it? — A, 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Would  that  be  the  natural  position  in  which  you  would  expect  to 
find  six  or  seven  shells  that  had  been  fired  out  of  one  of  those  high- 
power  Springfield  rifles? — A.  No,  sir;  it  would  be  impossible  to  find 
them  that  way. 

Q.  It  would  be  impossible? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  one  of  these  cartridges  is  fired  out  of  a Springfield  rifle 
such  as  you  were  equipped  v/ith  there,  how  far  would  the  shell  be 
thrown  ordinarily  by  the  ejector  ?— A.  Well,  ejecting  it  rather  quickly, 
I should  think  it  would  be  thrown  at  least  8 or  10  feet. 

Q.  And  then  when  the  shell  strikes  what  happens  to  it?  Does  it 
jump  or  bounce  about  on  the  ground? — A.  It  depends  on  the  nature  of 
the  ground. 

Q.  That  was  in  an  alley — a roadway. — A.  In  that  place  it  would 
stick.  It  w'as  soft  ground. 

Q.  In  soft  ground  it  might  not  bounce? — A.  No,  sir;  it  would  not 
bounce  at  all. 

Q.  Wlien  a soldier  or  anyone  else  stands  and  fires  one  of  these 
rifles,  holding  it  in  the  same  position,  does  each  one  of  five  or  six  shells 
fly  the  same  distance  and  in  exactly  the  same  dii-ection,  or  are  they 
likely  to  be  thrown  in  different  directions? — A.  d’hoy  would  be  very 
much  spread  about.  I do  not  think  any  two  would  drop  in  the  same 
place. 

Q.  They  would  be  scattered  over  perhaps  hov,^  much  ground? — A. 
Well,  perhaps  at  least  4 feet — 3 to  4 feet. 

Q.  Now,  ('aptain,  can  you  tell  us  v/hethcr  anybody  had  preceded 
you  there  that  morning  or  anybody  been  there  ahead  of  you  to  see 
those  shells? — A.  I am  satisfied  no  one  was  there,  sir.  I went  away 
and  made  an  inspection  of  my  sentinels  about  3.30  or  4 o’clock.  When 
I returned  the  sergeant  told  me  no  one  had  been  there. 

Q.  What  sergeant  was  that? — A.  That  was  Sergeant  Carlisle.  I 
took  Sergeant  Harley  with  me  on  my  inspection  of  the  sentinels. 

Q.  What  kind  of  men  are  Sergeant  Harley  and  Sergeant  Carlisle? 
Have  you  known  them  well  for  all  these  years  you  have  been  com- 
manding that  company? — A.  Yes,  sir;  you  can  depend  on  them 
anywhere. 

Q.  They  are  truthful,  reliable  men? — A.  Yes,  sir;  anywhere.  I 
would  go  anywhere  with  them. 

Ma.1or  Penrose  testifies  that  he  examined  some  of  these  shells 
])icked  up  by  Captain  Macklin,  and  tliis  is  important  in  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  shells  found  in  the  street  in  this  “ bunch  ” 
and  the  bullets  found  in  the  houses  do  not  correspond  or  belong 
with  each  other.  As  I said,  Major  Penrose  testifies  (Hearings, 
vol.3,  p.  301G)  that  he  examined  some  of  the  shells  picked  up  by 
Captain  Macklin ; that  they  bore  the  marks  and  were  the  shells 
manufactured  at  the  Frankford  Arstmal — a (Jovernment  arsenal. 
The  bullets  taken  from  the  houses  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the 
firing,  on  analysis,  showed  that  they  were  not  of  the  comi)osition 
of  any  bullet  manufactured  at  that  arsenal,  but  were  of  the  com- 
41816—7738 5 


66 


position  of  those  made  by  the  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Com- 
pany for  the  Government  under  the  contract  to  which  I have 
heretofore  referred,  as  well  as  for  commercial  sales ; so  that  it 
was  impossible  that  these  shells  found  at  the  mouth  of  the  alley 
where  the  firing  has  been  located,  or  fired  from  the  wall  or 
porch  of  the  barracks  as  is  charged,  could  have  been  used  in 
combination  with  the  bullets  found  in  the  houses.  I append 
here  the  analysis  of  cartridges  manufactured  at  Frankford 
Arsenal  and  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Company,  which  an- 
alysis was  made  at  the  Sandy  Hook  Proving  Grounds  by  the 
Government  chemist  stationed  there.  Also  from  Penrose  court- 
martial,  Senate  Document  402,  part  2,  page  1160: 

I don’t  know  how  many  cartridges  ; I didn't  count  them. 

Q.  Were  they  cartridges  or  shells? — A.  Shells;  empty  shells,  fired 
shells.  I examined  two  of  them,  took  them  from  his  hand  ; they  were 
Frankford  Arsenal  shells. 

Q.  For  what  rifle? — A.  For  our  Springfield  rifle.  I asked  him  where 
he  had  gotten  them,  and  he  said  right  at  the  mouth  of  the  alley. 

Hearings,  volume  3,  page  3389 : 

Sandy  Hook  Proving  Ground, 

Fort  HaiicocJCj  N.  J.,  December  20,  1907. 
report  from  the  chemical  laboratory. 

(Examination  of  lead  cores  of  caliber  .30  ball  cartridges,  model  1903. 

Laboratory  Nos.  4672  and  4673.) 

Two  caliber  .30  ball  cartridges,  model  of  1903,  made  by  Frankfort 
Arsenal  and  two  made  by  the  Union  Metaliic  Cartridge  Company  were 
received  from  the  Chief  of  Ordnance.  As  directed,  quantitative  analyses 
were  made  to  determine  the  major  constituents  of  the  lead  cores.  These 
Vv'ere  found  to  be  as  follows  : 


j. 


F.  A.  car- 
tridge. 

U.  M.  C. 

cartridge. 

Per  cent. 
96.21 

Per  cent. 
95.60 

None, 

1.95 

Tin  ' 

3.10 

1.45 

The  effect  of  the  addition  of  tin  to  lead  is  to  increase  the  toughness 
of  the  metal ; the  effect  of  the  addition  of  antimony  is  to  make  the  lead 
brittle.  The  differences  in  the  composition  of  the  lead  cores  of  these 
bullets  correspond  to  what  are  said  to  be  the  differences  in  the  shop 
practice  at  Frankford  Arsenal  and  the  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Com- 
pany’s works  by  casting,  for  which  process  the  presence  of  antimony 
is  unobjectionable.  The  usual  traces  of  copper  and  bismuth  are  present 
in  both  cases, 

OSWIN  W.  WiLLCOX, 

Assistant  Chemist. 

Examined  ; 

T.  C.  Dickson, 

Major,  Ordnance  Department,  United  States  Army. 


Also,  analysis  made  at  Frankford  Arsenal  of  bullets  manu- 
factured there  March  24,  1906. 

Hearings,  volume  3,  page  3324 : 

Frankford  Arsenal, 
Philadelphia,  Pa.,  December  12,  1907. 

Sir  : 1.  Referring  to  first  indorsement,  O.  O.  30803-135,  December  10, 
1907,  on  the  subject  of  antimony  in  bullet  cores,  I have  the  honor  to 
report  that  the  quantitative  analysis  referred  to  in  the  last  paragraph 
of  that  indorsement  has  been  completed. 

2.  The  composition  of  slugs  taken  from  ball  cartridges,  model  1903, 
manufactured  at  Frankford  Arsenal  March  24,  1906,  is  as  follows  : 


Lead 

Antimon.v 

418i0— 7738 


Per  cent. 
__  96.  85 
__  2.  89 

__  . 26 


67 


3.  The  composition  of  slues  taken  from  ball  cartridges,  model  1903, 
manufactured  at  Frankfoi’d  iJl’senal  December  2G,  1905,  is  as  follows  : 

Per  cent. 

r.ead 90.  90 

Tin 2.  82 

Antimony . 28 

4.  The  proportions  prescribed  are  30  parts  lead  to  1 part  tin,  or 
lead  90.77  per  cent  and  tin  3.23  per  cent.  Antimony  is  nearly  always 
found  in  commercial  lead  and  tin. 

Very  respectfully,  Frank  Heath, 

Colonel,  Ordnance  Department, 

United  States  Army,  Commandiny. 

The  Chief  of  Ordnance,  United  States  Army, 

Washington,  D.  C. 

Also,  analysis  of  bullets  maiuifactiired  by  the  Union  Metallic 
Cartridge  Company. 

Hearings,  volume  3,  page  3321 : 

CARD  ORDER  C. SAMPLE  NO.  1948. 


Frankford  Arsenal, 
rhiladelphia.  Fa.,  January  26,  1066. 
Sir  : The  lead  alloy  made  by  the  U.  M.  C.  Company,  submitted  for 
analysis  by  Capt.  S.  Hof,  contains — 


• X t:i  ccuL. 

Lead 94.  87 

Antimony 3.  29 

Tin 1.  08 


Total 99.  84 

Respectfully, 

W.  J.  Williams,  P.  I.  C.,  Chemist. 

The  Commanding  Officer,  Franlciord  Arsenal. 

(Through  Capt.  S.  Hof,  Ordnance  Department.) 

Also,  another  analysis  made  at  the  Frankford  Arsenal  of  bul- 
lets from  ammunition  of  the  character  issued  to  the  Twenty- 
fifth  Infantry  at  Fort  Niobrara. 

Hearings,  volume  3,  page  3328 : 


F.  A.  L.  8001 — SAMPLES  2553  and  2554. 

Frankford  Arsenal, 
Philadelphia,  Pa.,  Dccemhcr  17,  1907. 

Sir  : I have  the  honor  to  make  the  following  report  on  the  cores  of 
two  bullets  received  from  the  Ordnance  Office,  caliber  0.30,  model  of 
1903  : 


2553  (case 
marked  “ F.  A. 
I.  ’06”). 

2554  (“U.  M. 
0.  12.  ’05”). 

Lend  _ 

Per  cent. 

96.. 58 
3.26 
0.19 

Per  cent. 

95.46 

3.35 

1.16 

Tin  _ 

Antimnnv 

t Respectfully, 

W.  J.  Williams,  F.  I.  C.,  Chemist. 


The  Co.MMANDiNG  OFFICER,  Franicford  Arsenal. 

(Through  Maj.  S.  Hof,  Ordnance  Department.) 

Now,  no  antimony  except  the  usual  trace  of  from  ten  one- 
hundredths  to  fifteen  one-hundredths  per  cent  found  in  commer- 
cial lead  has  ever  been  traced  to  a bullet  made  at  the  Frank- 
ford Arsenal. 

41810—7738 


G8 


I have  included  here  numerous  analyses  of  bullets  manufac- 
tured at  all  these  places  by  the  Government  experts.  They 
were  made  by  the  Geological  Survey  or  at  the  Frankford  Arse- 
nal, and  they  all  attest  the  same  fact  and  prove  conclusively 
that  the  Frankford  arsenal  shell  exploded,  picked  up  in  the 
alley  in  the  vicinity  of  the  fort,  did  not  belong  with  the  Union 
Metallic  bullet  picked  out  of  the  house  in  the  immediate  vicinity. 
And  in  the  entire  block  from  Fifteenth  street  to  Fourteenth 
street,  on  which  a great  part  of  the  firing  was  done,  no  other 
shells  have  been  shown  in  evidence  anywhere  than  this  “ bunch  ” 
of  shells  picked  up  by  Captain  Macklin. 

These  several  analyses  made  by  the  Government  experts  show 
conclusively  that  the  bullets  found  in  the  Cowen,  Ytirrria,  and 
Garza  houses,  near  which  the  bunch  of  Frankford  Arsenal  shells 
were  found,  did  not  belong  to  the  Frankford  Arsenal  shells, 
and  thus  reveals  more  clearly  that  the  scattered  shells  about 
the  streets  of  Brownsville  were  fired  at  some  other  place,  un- 
doubtedly at  Fort  Niobrara,  and  wore  a part  of  and  in  further- 
ance of  the  conspiracy  to  get  rid  of  the  negro  soldiers  and  to 
fix  on  them  “the  shooting  up  of  the  city.” 

I will  not  refer  further  to  shells,  and  so  forth,  at  this  time,  as  I 
shall  have  occasion  to  discuss  this  subject  in  connection  with  the 
examination  of  the  guns  and  shells  by  the  Government  experts  at 
the  Springfield  Armory. 

The  bullets  taken  from  the  houses  on  the  route  followed  by 
the  raiders,  and  undoubtedly  used  during  the  raid,  remain  to  be 
accounted  for,  but  I think  it  the  better  course  to  take  up  the 
further  discussion  of  shells  and  bullets  in  connection  with  the 
guns  and  their  examination  by  the  Go’S'ernment  experts. 

The  Springfield  rifles,  model  1903,  which  it  is  charged  were 
used  by  the  raiders,  were  distributed  to  the  battalion  of  the 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry,  Companies  B,  C,  and  D,  at  Fort  Niobrara 
April,  1906,  and  were  in  use  at  that  post  both  in  target  practice 
and  company  exercise  during  the  remainder  of  their  stay  at  that 
post — the  latter  part  of  July,  1906 — when  the  command  was 
moved  to  Fort  Brown.  During  the  stay  at  Fort  Brown  target 
practice  was  not  engaged  in — the  range  was  at  Point  Isabel, 
some  20  or  more  miles  away — and  I find  no  evidence  that  am- 
munition of  any  character  was  expended  after  their  arrival  at 
this  post,  and  there  is  abundant  testimony  that  at  least  in  one 
of  the  companies  the  ball-cartridge  ammunition  was  taken  up 
and  guard  cartridge,  or  limited-range  ammunition,  substituted. 
IVe  need  give  but  little  consideration  to  the  large  number  of 
guns  in  the  hands  of  the  soldiers.  The  experts  at  the  Spring- 
field  Armory — Lieutenant  Hawkins,  of  the  Ordnance  Depart- 
ment, and  Mr.  Spooner,  inspector — have  located  the  shell  exhibits 
before  the  committee,  thirty-nine  in  number,  as  having  been 
fired  from  guns  Nos.  41019,  456S3,  422SS,  and  45624,  all  belong- 
ing or  assigned  to  Company  B,  said  company  being  the  one  that 
brought  from  Fort  Niobrara  the  box  of  exploded  cartridges,  the 
case  heretofore  alluded  to  in  the  testimony  of  First  Sergt.  Mingo 
Saunders. 

Gun  numbered  41019  was  assigned  to  Ernest  English. 

Gun  numbered  422SS  v\'as  assigned  to  Thomas  Taylor. 

Gun  numbered  45624  was  assigned  to  Joseph  Wilson. 

Gun  num1)ered  45683  was  assigned  to  William  Blaney. 

41810—7738 


69 


Hearings,  volume  2,  pages  1318-1319 : 

IV.  The  above  cartridges  and  cartridge  cases  v>'^ere  all  carefully  ex- 
amined under  a powerful  microscope  and  also  under  jewelers’  eyeglasses 
of  varying  powers.  This  examination  showed  that  some  of  these 
cartridges  had  been  fired  from  the  same  rifles,  viz  : 

Refer- 
ence No. 


Group  I. — Fired  in  rifle  No.  41010,  Company  B,  Twenty-fifth 
Infantry.  Reference  number  of  rifle  and  cartridge  case  from 
same,  No.  95. 


Group  II. — Fired  in  rifle  No.  45683,  Company  B,  Twenty-fifth 
Infantry.  Reference  number  of  rifle  and  cartridge  case  from 
same,  No.  81. 


Group  III. — Fired  in  rifle  No.  42288,  Company  B,  Twenty-fifth 
Infantry.  Reference  number  of  rifle  and  cartridge  case  from 
same,  No.  135. 


Group  IV. — Probably  fired  in  rifle  No.  46524,  Company  B,  Twenty- 
fifth  Infantry.  Reference  number  of  rifle  and  cartridge  case 
from  same,  No.  126. 

Group  V. — These  cartridges  were  not  fired,  and  have  insufficient 
gun  marks  to  identify  them  with  any  particular  rifle.  Num- 
ber 339  has  a slight  striker  impact,  but  this  imprint  is  so  slight 
(due  to  the  depressed  primer)  that  it  is  of  no  use  for  purposes 
of  identification. 

All  of  these  men  belonged  to  Company  B,  all  of  these  guns 
were  distributed  to  that  company,  and  a box  of  empty  cartridges 
brought  from  Fort  Niobrara  was  deposited  on  the  back  porch  of 
this  company’s  barracks  when  they  reached  Fort  Brown.  This 
examination  seems  to  have  located  this  firing — if  it  has  located 
it  at  all — within  the  ranks  of  Company  B ; and  these  thirty-nine 
shells  are  the  only  exhibit  furnished  by  Mayor  Combe  or  the 
district  attorney  or  the  War  Department  or  anybody  else  to  your 
committee. 

The  three  guns  assigned  to  English,  Taylor,  and  Wilson,  if 
the  testimony  of  the  noncommissioned  officers  in  charge  is  cor- 
rect, were  securely  locked  in  the  gun  racks,  which  were  not 
opened  until  after  the  firing  ceased — the  universal  evidence  of 
both  officers  and  men — consequently  no  shells  could  have  been 
fired  from  those  guns  in  the  streets  of  Brownsville  that  night, 
unless  collusion  between  noncommissioned  officers  and  men  can 
be  established,  and  of  this  there  is  not  a particle  of  evidence 
to  warrant. 

Cun  No.  450S3  was  assigned  to  Sergt.  William  Blaney  at 
Fort  Niobrara  when  first  received  and  distributed  to  the  men 
and  remained  in  his  possession,  or  as  his  gun,  until  the  expira- 
tion of  his  term  of  enlistment.  He  iHMUilisfed  .June  S,  190(5^ 
41816—7738 


312 

316 

321 
324 

326 

329 

331 

334 

336 

337 
301?1 
302? 
.307? 
311 

317 

319 

320 

330 
308 
310 

318 

322 

323 
32.5 

327 

328 

332 
833 

335 
303? 
301 
306 
305 

313 

314 

315 

338 

339 


TO 


when  he  accepted  a furlough  and  was  absent  from  Fort  Brown 
at  the  time  of  the  affray.  The  night  of  his  departure  he  turned 
over  the  keys  of  the  storeroom  to  his  successor,  Sergt.  Walker 
McCurdy,  calling  his  attention  to  the  fact  that  his  rifle  was 
there.  McCurdy  testified  (p.  1G58,  yoI.  3,  Hearings)  that  he 
inserted  in  the  chamber  a slip  of  paper  with  “ William  Blaney  ’’ 
written  upon  it,  to  keep  him  from  issuing  it  to  anybody  else; 
that  the  gun  ytiS  in  his  charge  until  Blaney’s  return  to  the 
command  at  Fort  Reno;  that  he  placed  said  gun  in  the  arm 
chest  at  Fort  Niobrara ; that  it  was  in  the  arm  chest  on  the 
night  of  August  13,  1006,  and  that  when  the  gun  was  returned 
to  Blaney  at  El  Reno  the  slip  of  paper  marked  with  his  name 
still  remained  in  the  chamber. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  Who  testified  about  the  pa*per  be- 
ing placed  in  the  gun? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  The  quartermaster’s  sergeant,  who  had 
charge  of  the  guns  after  Blaney  reenlisted  and  took  a furlough 
and  went  away.  The  quartermaster’s  sergeant  took  the  gun 
into  the  storeroom,  inserted  a piece  of  paper  in  the  chamber, 
and  then  he  delivered  it  over  to  Blaney  at  El  Reno  when  he 
came  back  frqm  his  furlough,  where  the  troops  were  sent  after 
the  affray,  and  he  found  this  same  slip  of  paper  in  the  cham- 
ber of  the  gun. 

IMr.  PILES.  Mr.  President 

The  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  the  Senator  from  Washington? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  PILES.  I want  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
whether  this  quartermaster’s  sergeant  is  a colored  man? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  He  was  a member  of  the  Twenty-fifth 
Infantry. 

jMr.  PILES.  I was  in  doubt  about  it. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Michigan.  And  he  put  the  paper  in  the  gun? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  Yes.  He  had  served  four  or  five  enlist- 
ments ; had  been  discharged  at  the  close  of  each  enlistment  with 
a good  character,  such  as  to  entitle  him  to  reenlist  again,  and 
the  Government  was  glad  to  retain  him  in  its  service.  It  was 
testified  to  by  General  Burt,  retired,  who  had  once  commanded 
those  troops,  and  by  all  his  ofncers,  that  he  was  a man  entitled 
to  every  confidence. 

I can  not  refrain  from  repeating  here  what  was  said  by  an  old 
Army  officer,  who  for  twenty  years  commanded  the  Twenty-fifth 
Infantry — and  he  said  it  with  tears  rolling  down  his  cheeks — 
that  he  had  intrusted,  in  his  absence,  his  wife  and  family  un- 
attended to  the  care  of  these  men  while  he  was  engaged  in  a 
march  of  four  or  five  hundred  miles  over  the  plains  and  the 
desert. 

Lieutenant  Lawrason  describes  the  condition  of  the  arm  chest 
when  he  inspected  the  same  on  the  morning  of  the  14th,  after 
the  affray.  I will  here  append,  at  length,  his  testimony,  to- 
gether with  that  of  Sergeants  Blaney  and  McCurdy. 

Hearings,  volume  2,  page  1658  (McCurdy's  testimony)  : 

Q.  Who  had  been  quartermaster-sergeant  prior  to  that  date? — A. 
Sergt.  William  Blaney. 

Q.  What  hook  is  that  in  front  of  you  there?  See  if  you  recognize 
it. — A.  This  is  the  company's  proi>erty  book,  sir. 

Q.  The  company  property  hook  of  Companj'  B? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

4181G— 7738 


71 


Q.  Will  you  turn  to  that  and  see  what  gun  Sergeant  Blaney  had  as- 
signed to  him,  according  to  that  book,  when  these  new  Springfield  rifles 
were  issued? — A.  (Examining  book.)  I think  it  was  45G83. 

Q.  45683?— A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  it  has  been  testified  to,  I believe,  that  Sergeant  Blaney  was 
absent  on  furlough.  When  did  he  go  away  on  furlough? — A.  It  was 
about  the  same  time  I was  made  quartermaster-sergeant — about  the 
9th  or  10th  of  June. 

Q.  That  is,  you  succeeded  him  when  he  went  away  on  furlough? — • 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Had  he  returned  while  you  were  yet  at  Brownsville?  When 
did  he  return? — A.  He  returned  at  El  Reno. 

Q.  He  was  not  with  you  at  Fort  Brown  at  all? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  done  with  his  gun  when  he  left  to  go  on  furlough 
the  9th  of  June,  or  whatever  date  it  W'as? — A.  He  took  it  up  and 
packed  it  away. 

Q.  He  turned  it  in? — A.  No,  sir;  he  turned  in  his  own  rifle.  He 
will  tell  you  himself  that  vrlien  he  returned  there  was  a slip  of  paper 
put  in  the  chamber  to  show  whose  rifle  it  was,  to  keep  me  from 
issuing  it  to  anyone  else. 

Q.  Who  put  that  in  there?— A.  I put  it  in  there  myself. 

Q.  What  was  on  that  slip  of  paper? — A.  “William  Blaney.” 

<5.  Now,  when  he  returned,  were  you  still  w'ith  the  conipany? — A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  At  El  Reno? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  were  still  quartermaster-sergeant? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  did  you  continue  as  quartermaster-sergeant? — A.  Until  I was 
discharged,  sir. 

Q.  Until  you  were  discharged? — A.  Yes,  sir, 

Q.  Now,  what  was  done  in  the  matter  of  providing  Sergeant  Blaney 
with  a gun? — A.  I gave  him  his  same  rifle  back- 

Q.  You  gave  him  back  that  same  rifle? — A,  Yes,  sir. 

Hearings,  vol.  2,  pp.  1748-1749  (Blaney’s  testimony)  : 

Q.  Were  you  with  the  regiment  at  Fort  Niobrara? — A.  Yes.  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  with  the  regiment  at  the  time  when  the  new  Springfield 
rifles  wore  issued  to  the  regiment? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  V/hat  position  in  the  company  did  you  hold  at  that  time? — A.  1 
was  company  quartermaster-sergeant. 

Q.  You  were  familiar  with  the  property  hook  of  Company  B? — A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  a rifle  issued  to  you  at  that  time? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

().  You  yourself  v/ere  then  the  quartermaster-sergeant? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

(j.  1‘lease  look  at  the  hook  I now  hand  you  and  tell  me  what  it 
is. — A.  It  is  B Company’s  property  book. 

Q.  Turn  to  the  account  of  the  men  with  the  rifles  and  tell  me  what 
that  property  book  shows  as  to  your  own  rifle. — A.  For  the  present? 

Q.  Just  tell  me  what  it  shows.  Not  as  to  the  present,  but  as  to  the 
new  Springfield  rifle  which  was  issued  at  Fort  Niobrara  in  April,  I 
believe  it  was,  1906.  I want  the  number  of  your  gun.— A.  Yes  ; this 
book  gives  me  one  rifle,  and  it  is  numbered. 

Q.  What  number? — A.  45683. 

Q.  Is  that  rifle  receipted  for  by  you? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  issued  to  jmu  as  indicated  there? — A.  Yes;  it  was. 

Q.  Is  that  the  rifle,  now  that  you  see  the  number,  that  you  had  while 
you  were  at  Fort  Niobrara? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  time  did  you  leave  the  company  at  Fort  Niobrara  to  go  on 
your  furlough? — A.  On  the  8th  of  June. 

Q.  You  left  some  time  before  the  battalion  went  to  Fort  Brown? — 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  that  rifle  in  your  possession  until  that  time? — A. 
Yes,  sir ; I did. 

Q.  Did  you  or  not  use  that  rifle  at  Fort  Niobrara  on  target  range  in 
target  firing? — A.  Yes;  I used  it  on  the  8th  day  of  June — on  the  very 
day  that  I left, 

Q.  On  the  day  that  you  loft  what  did  you  do  with  your  gun? — A. 
I took  it  in  the  storeroom  after  I got  through  firing  and  kept  it  in 
there. 

Q.  Who  succeeded  you  as  quartermaster-sergeant? — A.  Walker 
McCurdy. 

Q.  Was  he  the  quartermaster-sergeant  and  did  you  turn  the  gun 
over  to  him  that  night,  oi  what  did  you  do  with  it? — No;  I took 
it  in  the  storeroom  myself.  I had  the  keys,  and  I did  not  turn  the 
keys  over  to  him  until  that  evening.  I fired  that  moiaiing,  but  I thirdc 
it  was  in  the  evening  when  I turned  the  keys  over  to  him. 

41816—7738 


72 


Q.  When  did  you  next  see  that  ride?  Did  you  call  his  attention  to 
your  own  rifle  or  not  before  you  left  there  as  being  turned  into  the 
storeroom? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  State  whether  or  not  your  rifle  was  marked  in  any  way,  if  you 
know,  besides  the  number  on  it. — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  I only  want  your  recollection. — A.  No  ; not  as  I know  of. 

Q.  You  turned  it  over  to  Sergeant  McCurdy,  or  I mean  you  left  it 
in  the  storeroom  and  McCurdy  succeeded  you  as  quartermaster-ser- 
geant?— A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  he  came  at  once  into  possession  of  it? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  did  you  next  see  your  rifle? — A.  At  Fort  Reno. 

Q.  You  did  not  return  to  your  company  until  it  arrived  at  Fort 
Reno? — A.  No. 

Hearings,  volume  2,  pages  1581,  1582,  1583  (Lawrason’s  testi- 
mony) : 

Q.  Who  was  in  charge  of  the  storehouse,  or  storeroom,  whichever 
you  call  it? — A.  Quartermaster-Sergeant  Walker  McCurdy. 

Q.  Was  he,  also,  an  old  sergeant? — A.  Yes,  sir;  he  was  an  old  ser- 
geant of  Company  B. 

Q.  Was  he  or  not  a reliable  and  truthful  man? — A.  I always  be- 
lieved him  to  be  such,  sir. 

Q.  He  had  been  in  the  service  many  years,  had  he  not? — A.  Yes,  sir: 
he  had. 

Q.  And  had  everybody’s  confidence  as  a good  soldier  and  a faithful 
noncommissioned  officer? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  lie  was  the  quartermaster-sergeant ; as  quartermaster-sergeant 
what  was  his  duty  with  respect  to  the  surplus  rifles  and  surplus  am- 
munition— I mean  surplus  in  the  sense  that  it  was  not  in  the  hands  of 
the  men? — A.  lie  was  accountable  for  it,  and  it  was  his  business  to 
keep  it  locked  up. 

Q.  You  went  to  the  storeroom  after  you  locked  up  the  rifles ; who 
went  with  you  to  the  storeroom? — A.  The  quartermaster-sergeant. 

Q.  Sergeant  McCurdy? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  do,  and  what  did  you  tell  him,  and  in  what  con- 
dition did  you  find  the  room  ; v/as  it  locked  or  unlocked  when  you  went 
to  it? — A.  It  was  locked  and  he  opened  it.  He  took  out  a bunch  of 
keys,  as  I recollect  it,  and  fumbled  around  and  got  the  right  key  and 
unlocked  the  door.  The  storeroom  was  very  small,  and  we  could  not 
put  all  of  our  quartermaster  property  in  there,  and  there  was  some 
confusion  in  the  way  in  which  the  stuT  was  piled.  We  had  to  remove 
a lot  of  company  property. 

Q.  I will  come  to  that  in  a minute.  What  did  you  tell  Sergeant 
McCurdy  you  wanted  in  the  storeroom  when  you  went  there ; did  you 
tell  him  or  not  what  you  wanted  to  do  until  you  got  into  the  store- 
room ? — A.  No,  sir  : when  I got  into  the  storeroom  I told  him  that  I 
wanted  to  see  the  rifles  that  he  had  in  the  storeroom. 

Q.  That  is,  rifles  that  he  had  in  his  possession? — xV.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  know  li4)w  many  rifles  he  had  in  his  possession  at  the 
time? — A.  I did,  by  referring  to  the  company  property  book  which 
was  kept  there. 

Q.  We  will  speak  about  that  presently.  Now,  go  on  and  state  what 
you  did  and  what  he  did  when  j’ou  told  him. — A.  He  told  me  that  the 
rifles  were  locked  up  in  the  arm  chests.  I told  him  to  open  them,  and 
he  opened  one  fuli  arm  chest  that  contained  ten  rifles,  and  also  opened 
another  that,  I believe,  contained  two  or  three  rifles  and  several  old 
company  shotguns. 

Q.  Now,  before  you  opened  the  arm  chests,  let  me  ask  you  whether 
or  not  they  were  easy  to  get  at,  or  vffiether  there  was  anything  on  top 
of  them? — A.  No,  sir;  thej’’  were  not  easy  to  get  at.  As  I recollect, 
we  removed  considerable  property  before  we  got  the  arm  chests  out 
and  got  room  to  unscrew  the  lids. 

Q.  What  kind  of  property  was  this? — A.  Iron  quartermaster  bunks 
and,  I believe,  some  iron  uprights  to  hold  mosquito  bars — T-shaped 
things. 

Q.  They  had  been  piled  on  top  of  these  arm  chests,  had  they? — -A. 
Yes,  sir  ; and  were  standing  against  the  wall,  between  us  and  the  arm 
chests. 

Q.  When  had  you  last  before  that  seen  these  arm  chests,  and 
where? — A.  I had  seen  them  at  Fort  Niobrara,  Nebr.,  before  shipment, 
and  when  they  were  unloaded  from  the  wagons  and  placed  in  the  store- 
house at  Fort  Brown. 

Q.  Where  were  these  extra  guns  placed  in  these  arm  chests,  whether 
at  Fort  Niobrara  or  Fort  Brown,  or  where? — A.  They  were  placed  in 
the  arm  chests  at  Fort  Niobrara. 

41810—7738 


73 


Q.  Do  you  remeru’oer  seeing  the  guns — rifles — put  in  the  arm  chests 
and  the  arm  chests  closed  up  for  shipment  at  Fort  Niobrara? — A.  I do 
not  believe  I was  present  when  the  property  was  boxed  up.  It  was 
boxed  up  sometime  before  our  departure,  and  Captain  Shattuck  was  in 
command  of  the  company  at  that  time. 

Q.  You  have  told  us  in  what  condition  you  found  the  chests  as  to 
other  property  being  piled  on  top  ; this  property  was  removed,  was  it, 
from  the  tops  of  the  chests? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  were  the  chests  opened,  or  not  ? — A.  They  were  opened 
under  my  supervision  and  the  arms  counted. 

Q.  State  in  what  condition  you  found  the  inside  of  those  chests,  as 
to  the  arms. — A.  The  arms  were  placed  in  the  proper  grooves  for  them, 
and  they  were  battened  dowm,  or  held  down  by  cleats  that  fit  in  the 
boxes,  to  prevent  their  rattling  around  during  shipment. 

Q.  They  had  been  fixed  that  way  before  they  had  left  Niobrara? — A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  were  they  in  that  same  condition  when  you  opened  them  that 
night? — A.  They  were  in  the  same  condition,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  count  the  rifles  when  they  were  opened  up? — A.  Yes, 
sir  ; I counted  them. 

Q.  I will  ask  you  another  question,  whether  or  not,  before  these 
rifles  were  shipped  from  Fort  Niobrara,  they  were  coated  with  cos- 
moline  oil  or  any  other  kind  of  oil? — A.  I believe  they  were  coated 
with  cosmoline  oil  at  the  time  I looked  at  them  at  Fort  Brown. 

Q.  When  you  looked  at  them  was  there  any  indication  that  they 
had  been  disturbed  in  any  way  whatever  since  they  had  been  boxed  up 
at  Fort  Niobrara? — A.  No,  sir;  there  was  not;  I did  not  take  out  all 
the  rifles  ; I could  count  them  without  taking  them  out  of  the  boxes  ; 
I picked  up  one  or  two  from  the  top. 

Q.  And  you  did  count  the  rifles  in  both  boxes? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  remember  that  the  requisite  number  of  rifles  were  there, 
added  to  the  other  rifles  that  you  found  in  the  racks,  and  that  you 
counted  as  away  from  there,  to  make  up  the  number  of  70? — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  There  was  not  a rifle  missing,  was  there? — A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  can  you  tell  us  anything  about  what  rifles  Avere  in  those 
boxes — I mean  whether  any  of  those  rifles  had  been  assigned  at  any 
time  previously  to  anybody,  and  if  so,  to  whom,  in  the  absence  of  the 
property  book,  or  would  “you  rather  have  the  property  book  before 
you  go  into  that? — A.  I can  state  Avithout  the  property  book  that  quite 
a number  of  those  rifles  that  were  packed  had  been  used  in  target 
firing  at  Fort  Niobrara,  Nebr. 

Q.  I Avish  that  you  v.muld  tell  me,  as  nearly  as  you  can,  just  Avhat 
rifles,  giving  me  the  names  of  the  men  Avho  carried  them — we  Avill  get 
the  numbers  later — were  in  that  box  that  had  been  used  in  target 
practice  or  in  any  Avay  by  men  to  whom  they  h.ad  been  assigned  before 
you  left  Fort  Niobrara  “for  Fort  Brown. — A.  Well,  Sergeant  Blaney 
had  taken  part  in  target  practice,  and  his  rifle  Avas  in  the  box. 

Q.  Tell  me  why  he  was  not  with  you  and  Avhy  his  rifle  Avas  in  the 
box,  before  we  pass  that. — A.  He  was  not  with  us  because  he  was  on 
furlough. 

Q.  IIoAV  long  a furlough  did  he  have? — A.  I believe  he  had  tAvo 
months,  sir  ; I am  not  positive. 

Q.  Well,  he  had  reenlisted,  had^he  not?  lie  had  a furlough  on  tlmt 
account? — A.  Ileenlisted  on  the  expiration  of  term  of  enlistment  and 
then  been  given  a furlough. 

Q.  And  before  he  left  on  furlough  ho  turned  his  rifle  in? — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  And  that  was  in  the  box? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  He  had  not  returned  from  his  furlough? — A.  No,  sir;  he  had  not. 

Mr.  PILES.  Mr.  Prosident 

The  ATCE-PRESIDENT.  Does  the  Senator  from  Connecticut 
yield  to  tlie  Senator  from  AVashingtou? 

Mr.  P.ULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  PILES.  I Avisli  to  inquire  of  the  Senator  from  Connecti- 
cut whether  it  is  charged  tlnit  this  gun  bearing  the  name  of 
AAMlliam  Planey,  in  which  tlie  slip  of  pai)er  Avas  inserted,  Avas 
one  of  tlie  guns  used  on  the  niglit  of  this  raid? 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  It  was  claimed  that  it  Avas  identihed  as 
such  by  the  experts  of  * the  Springtield  Armory.  Avho  located 
eight  or  nine  or  ten  shells  as  having  been  tired  from  this  gun. 

418IG— 7738 


74 


Mr.  PILES.  I just  v/aiited  to  bring  out  that  point. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  There  is  some  claim  that  this  gun,  when 
examined  at  the  Springfield  Armory,  bore  marks  of  recent  fir- 
ing; at  least  it  was  dirty;  but  Blaney  himself  explained  that. 
He  said  that  on  the  morning  he  turned  in  his  gun  he  had  been 
to  target  practice  on  the  local  range  in  the  fort  with  reduced 
ammunition,  and,  as  he  says,  “ I coated  it  with  cosmoline  oil.” 

Lieutenant  Lawrason  .the  morning  after  the  affray,  when  he 
was  ordered  by  Major  Penrose  to  inspect  and  account  for  his- 
rifles,  first  examined  those  in  the  gun  rack  and  then  went  to 
the  storeroom.  I read  from  his  testimony  on  pages  1585-1586: 

Q.  You  made  this  examination,  you  and  Sergeant  McCurdy,  your 
quartermaster-sergeant,  and  you  thorougly  satisfied  yourself,  did  you, 
that  those  boxes  had  not  been  opened  since  they  left  Niobrara? — A. 
Y^es,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  every  gun  was  in  there  that  was  placed  there  before  you 
left  Niobrara? — A.  I believe  such  to  be  the  case,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  not  only  from  the  counting  of  the  guns,  but  from  the 
general  appearance,  the  undisturbed  appearance,  of  the  condition  in 
which  you  found  the  guns?— A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  if  the  boxes  had  been  opened  it  would  have  involved  the 
removal  of  all  this  baggage  which  you  found  on  top  of  them.  Before 
v/e  leave  that  I will  ask  you  another  question.  You  saw  the  guns  put 
in  the  racks  and  locked  up.  How  many  keys  were  there  to  the  gun 
racks  by  which  those  gun  racks  might  have  been  opened  that  night? — ■ 
A.  There  was  only  one  key,  I believe,  to  each  lock.  I knov/  that  on 
the  bunch  of  keys  the  key  that  would  unlock  rack  No.  1,  for  instance, 
would  not  unlock  rack  No.  2. 

A careful  microscopic  examination  of  tlie  marks  upon  the 
shells  made  b3"  the  firing  pins,  when  compared  with  the  marks 
upon  shells  fired  from  the  same  guns — all  the  gnus  belonging 
to  this  battalion  which  they  had  had  at  Fort  Niobrara,  after 
they  were  sent  to  Fort  Reno,  were  dispatched  to  the  Spring- 
field  Armory  for  the  purpose  of  these  microscopic  experi- 
ments— were  found  to  be  so  exactly  similar  that  the  ex- 
jierts  found  little  difficulty  in  locating  the  shells  or  exhibits 
from  the  committee  in  the  four  guns  which  I have  just  con- 
sidered. The  conclusions  reached  by  the  experts — Lieuten- 
ant HaAvkins  and  Inspector  Spooner — were  so  convincing  that 
they  were  never  questioned  either  by  the  committee  or  any 
parties  interested;  but  instead  of  tending  to  show  the  guilt  of 
the  soldiers,  these  mute  utterances  of  the  marks  upon  the  empty 
shells  attested  their  absolute  innocence — in  view  of  the  po- 
sition of  those  guns  the  night  of  August  13,  especially  the 
fourth  gun,  which,  bej-ond  anj"  question,  could  not  have  been 
in  the  hands  of  the  soldiers.  If  these  views  are  correct,  the 
combination  of  the  shells  and  bullets  necessary  to  establish  the 
finding  of  a majority  of  your  committee,  that  these  shells  and 
bullets  “ in  combination  ” could  only  have  been  fired  from  a 
Springfield  rifle,  model  1903,  falls  to  the  ground. 

General  Crozier,  the  chief  of  the  Ordnance  Department,  has 
been  interested  in  the  subject,  and  through  his  orders  all  these 
examinations  were  made.  General  Crozier  says.  Hearings, 
volume  3,  page  2854: 

By  Senator  Foraker  : 

Q.  That  is  to  say,  these  bullets  are  apparently  just  such  bullets  as 
you  would  expect  to  find  fired  out  of  Springfield  cartridges? — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  And  assuming  that  these  empty  shells  were  the  shells  that  held 
the  bullets,  then  you  would  assume  that  it  was  a Springfield  rifle  from 
which  they  were  fired? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

41810—7738 


I have  already,  I think,  to  the  satisfaction  of  everyone,  if  the 
testimony  is  correct — and  there  is  nothing  to  contradict  it— 
separated  absolutely  the  shells  from  the  bullets.  The  shells 
came  from  the  Frankford  Arsenal  and  the  bullets  from  the 
Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Company,  both  of  which  make  com- 
pleted cartridges.  A shell  manufactured  by  the  Frankford 
Arsenal,  found  in  a house,  would  not,  under  any  human  prob- 
ability, be  associated  wnth  a bullet  manufactured  by  the  Union 
Metallic  Cartridge  Company.  They  do  not  do  business  that 
way.  Continuing,  General  Crozier  testified : 

Q.  But,  aside  from  that  premise,  they  might  have  been  fired  out  of 
either  a Krag  or  a Springfield? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  They  might  have  been  fired  out  of  a Krag  carbine,  also? — A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  That  is  to  say,  the  Krag  carbine  and  the  Krag  rifle  and  the 
Springfield  rifle  all  have  the  same  number  of  lands? — A,  Yes,  sir;  and 
the  bullet  is  the  same  for  each. 

Q.  Each  has  four  lands,  and  the  bullet  is  the  same  ? — A.  Yes,  sir ; 
and  the  bullet  is  the  same. 

By  Senator  Overman  : 

Q.  You  are  only  speaking  as  to  the  bullet  now? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

In  commenting  upon  the  examination  of  the  guns,  shells,  and 
bullets  examined  by  the  experts  of  the  Ordnance  Department 
at  the  Springfield  AA'inory,  the  facts  established  and  the  con- 
clusions reached,  the  General,  in  his  annual  report  for  the  fiscal 
year  ending  June  30,  1907,  page  30,  in  discussing  these  micro- 
scopic examinations,  distinguishing  marks,  and  the  location  of 
these  shells  in  particular  guns,  says,  and  says  truthfully  and 
without  bias : 

The  bearing  of  these  facts  upon  the  identity  of  the  persons  doing  the 
firing  and  upon  the  time  when  the  cases  and  bullets  were  fired  in  the 
guns  is  not  a concern  of  this  Department. 

And  they  did  not  attempt  to  solve  it.  Under  all  the  examina- 
tions of  the  Ordnance  Department  the  evidence,  putting  all  the 
circumstances  of  this  investigation  together,  proves  conclusively 
that  these  shells  were,  as  these  marks  indicate  beyond  any  man- 
ner of  question,  fired  upon  the  target  grounds  at  Fort  Niobrara. 
It  is  remarkable,  in  connection  with  this  examination,  that 
all  the  shells  located  were  in  the  guns  of  Company  B,  who 
brought  from  Fort  Niobrara  the  box  of  empty  shells,  or  cases, 
heretofore  referred  to. 

General  Crozier  testifies  (page  2S54)  that  the  bullets  taken 
from  the  houses  might  have  been  fired  from  a Krag,  a Krag 
carbine,  or  a Springfield,  and  if  fired  from  any  one  of  the  three 
would  bear  the  marks  of  the  same  number  of  lands — the  Krag 
and  the  Krag  carbine  were  not  unknown  guns  in  the  locality 
of  Brownsville. 

The  difficulty  in  identifying  bullets  used  in  different  rifles  is 
best  illustrated  by  referring  to  the  testimony  of  Captain  Ely, 
Twenty-sixth  Infantry,  to  whom  was  exhibited  two  perfect  car- 
tridges, and  he  was  asked  to  tell  which  was  the  Krag  and  which 
was  the  Si)ringfield.  After  a careful  examination  he  selected 
the  Krag  for  the  Springfield  bullet. 

I append  his  testimony.  Hearings,  volume  3,  pages  2G0G-2007 : 

A.  (Continiiing.)  If  I was  going  to  jurlgc  which  of  the  two  was  tlie 
more  probable,  I would  say  more  probably  the  new  Springfield,  from 
what  seems  to  me  to  be  the  moi'e  pointed  nose  of  the  bullets. 

Q.  Those  three  bullets  when  shown  to  you  seemed  to  be  Springfield 
bullets? — A.  Yes,  sir. 

4181G— 7738 


76 


Q.  And  they  were  all  the  same  size  and  all  the  same  general  appear- 
ance except  as  they  were  disfigured  by  meeting  with  obstructions? — • 
A.  Yes.  sir. 

Q.  And  they  seemed  to  you  to  have  a more  pointed  nose  than  the 
Krag  bullets? — A.  They  seemed  to,  although  I would  not  say  that  it 
was  impossible  that  they  should  be  Krags. 

Q.  Now,  Captain,  is  there  any  difference  whatever  in  the  actual 
form  and  figure  of  the  two  bullets  ? — A.  I believe  so  ; yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  think  there  is? — A.  Yes,  sir;  I have  taken  them  and  com- 
pared them.  I have  taken  the  cartridges  and  compared  the  two,  and 
it  seems  to  me  that  there  is  quite  a little  difference. 

Q.  Is  that  plainly  preceptible? — A.  No.  sir;  it  is  not  plainly  per- 
ceptible. 

Q.  It  requires  very  close  scrutiny  when  the  bullets  are  in  the  car- 
tridges, before  they  have  been  fired? — A.  Y'es,  sir. 

Q.  To  detect  any  difference  between  them? — A.  Yes,  sir;  it  does. 

Q.  And  is  it  not  next  to  impossible  to  detect  any  difference  there 
may  be  after  they  have  been  fired,  if  they  had  gone  through  any 
obstruction  ?— A.  Well,  I would  hardly  say  next  to  impossible,  but  it 
is  difficult. 

Q.  Of  the  two  bullets  here  which  I show  you,  can  you  tell  which 
is  which?  One  is  a Ktag  and  the  other  is  a Springfield. — A.  I should’ 
say  this  was  the  Springfield. 

Q.  See  if  it  is. — A.  No,  sir  ; it  is  not. 

Q.  That  is  the  Krag,  isn't  it? — A.  Yes,  sir, 

Q.  That  shows  that  you  may  be  mistaken  about  it,  doesn't  it,  as  to 
the  appearance? — A.  Yes.  sir. 


It  is  hardly  obligatory,  Mr.  President,  in  view  of  the  con- 
clusion I have  reached  in  the  matter  of  the  shells  and  the  bul- 
lets, but  I think  it  proper,  in  view  of  the  testimony  in  relation  to 
the  composition  of  the  bullets,  to  state  that  up  to  the  time  of  the 
discovery  upon  analysis  by  a Government  expert  of  the  Geo- 
logical Survey  it  had  been  expressly  claimed  that  no  steel- 
jacketed  bullet  had  been  issued  to  the  Army  containing  anti- 
mony. (See  letter  of  General  Crozier,  Chief  of  Ordnance.) 

Hearings,  volume  3,  page  3309: 


War  Department, 

Office  of  the  Chief  of  Ordnance, 

Washington^  December  6,  ISOt. 

Hon.  Jos.  B.  Foraker, 

United  States  Senate. 


Sir  : You  are  informed  that  the  history  of  jacketed  bullets  for  .30 
caliber  small  arms  manufactured  by  this  Department  is  as  follows  : 

Various  experimental  compositions  were  tried,  including  some  in 
which  the  core  was  composed  of  97  parts  lead  and  3 parts  antimony, 
but  these  were  never  issued  to  the  service. 

The  first  ammunition  with  jacketed  bullets,  issued  to  the  service  in 
1894,  had  the  core  of  the  bullet  composed  of  7 parts  lead  and  1 
part  tin,  and  the  jacket  of  German  silver.  In  the  same  year  bullets 
were  also  issued  with  a cupro  nickeled  steel  jacket,  and  the  same  core 
composition  as  above. 

In  May,  1898,  cupro  nickel  jackets  were  also  used. 

In  the  fall  of  1900  cupro  nickeled  steel  jackets  were  abandoned,  and 
cupro  nickel  alone  has  since  been  used. 

On  December  IG.  1902,  the  composition  of  the  core  of  the  bullet  was 
changed  to  27  parts  lead  to  1 of  tin. 

On  March  11,  1903,  it  was  changed  to  20  parts  lead  to  1 part  tin. 

On  October  24,  1904,  it  v/as  changed  to  16  parts  lead  to  1 of  tin,  and 
on  March  IS,  1905,  it  was  changed  to  3G  parts  lead  to  1 of  tin.  The 
last  mentioned  has  continued  to  be  the  composition  to  the  present  time. 

The  changes  were  made  to  keep  the  weight  of  the  bullet  constant, 
and  were  coincident  with  changes  In  the  thickness  of  the  jacket.  It  is, 
of  course,  possible  that  slight  variations  from  prescribed  proportions 
may  have  been  obtained  in  manufacture. 

The  cupro  nickel  jacket  is  composed  of  85  per  cent  copper  and  15 
per  cent  nickel. 

The  history  of  the  bullet  given  above  is  for  the  Krag  rifle  ammuni- 
tion up  to  March  11,  1903,  since  which  date  it  applies  to  the  bullets  for 
both  the  Krag  and  the  model  of  1903  rifies,  the  same  bullet  being  used 
in,  both. 

41816—7738 


77 


2.  The  composition  given  for  the  guard  cartridge  in  the  handbook 
for  the  United  States  magazine  rifle,  model  of  1903,  caliber  .30.  page 
46,  is  in  error  in  giving  the  composition  of  the  bullet,  which  should  be 
90  parts  lead,  8.5  parts  tin,  and  1.5  paiis  antimony. 

Very  respectfully, 

William  Crozier, 

Brigadier-Ocneral,  Chief  of  Ordnance. 
And  the  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Company,  who  had  manu- 
factured bullets  for  the  Government,  had  likewise  insisted  that 
they  had  never  used  antimony  (see  the  following  letters)  : 
Hearings,  volume  3,  pages  3336-3337 : 

The  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Cojipany, 

Bridgeport,  Conn.,  June  13,  1907. 

Dear  Sir  ; Replying  to  your  letter  of  the  12th  instant,  making  in- 
quiry concerning  the  composition  of  the  bullets  furnished  with  the 
different  cartridges,  as  enumerated,  wish  to  advise  as  follows  : 

Springfield,  model  1903  bullet — 36  parts  lead,  1 part  tin. 

Un jacketed  guard  cartridge  bullet — 9 parts  lead,  1 part  tin. 

Krag  metal-cased  bullet — 20  parts  lead,  1 part  antimony. 

Trusting  this  information  will  be  of  service  to  you,  we  are. 

Yours,  truly, 

Tub  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Co., 

By  J.  Orcutt,  Manager  and  Superintendent. 

lion.  .Tosepii  B.  Foraker, 

United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  C. 


The  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Company, 

Bridgeport,  Conn.,  December  6,  1907. 
Dear  Sir  : With  reference  to  our  telephone  conversation  of  this  morn- 
ing, it  is  my  understanding  that  you  desire  to  ascertain  what  particular 
bullets  are  represented  by  the  mixtures  given,  which  were  as  follows; 


Lead. 

Tin.; 

Antimony. 

'N’o.  1 

Per  cent. 
95.70 
95.59 
96.36 

Per  cent. 
2.02 
2.11 
2.05 

Per  cent. 

1.97 

1.9S 

1.29 

TSTn.  9. 

NTo.  a . _ 

While  these  mixtures  do  not  represent  any  bullet  which  we  manufac- 
ture, they  come  the  nearest  to  a .30  Government,  model  1898,  bullet. 

We  trust  that  this  information  may  be  of  service  to  you,  and  remain, 
Yours,  truly. 

The  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Co., 

By  Jerome  Orcutt, 

Manager  and  Superintendent. 

lion.  .To.seph  B.  Foraker. 

United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  C. 


The  Union  INIetallic  Cartridge  Co., 

Bridgeport,  Conn.,  December  10,  1907. 

Dear  Sir  : Replying  to  your  telephone  communication  of  the  7th 
instant,  with  reference  to  the  composition  of  the  Springfield  bullets, 
190.3  model,  wish  to  advise  that  they  were  made  in  accordance  with  the 
specifications  furnished  by  the  Government. 

We  refer  to  blueprint  B-582,  last  date  of  revision  being  lUarch  27, 
1905,  describing  “ Ball  cartridges,  United  States  magazine  rifle,  model 
1903,”  as  follows  : 

” Bullet ; Weight,  220  grains ; core,  30  parts  lead,  1 part  tin 
(about) .” 

Yours,  truly.  The  TTxio.n  Metallic  Cartridge  C'o., 

By  J.  Orcutt,  Manager  and  Superintendent. 

lion.  Joseph  B.  Foraker, 

United  States  Senate,  Washington,  D.  C. 

The  letters  were  all  written,  as  testilied  by  the  siiperintendent, 
after  a careful  examiiuition  of  the  records  at  the  factory. 
AVJien  it  hecfime  necessary  to  connect  the  soldiers  with  the  raid 
41816—7738 


78 


throiigli  the  examination  used,  it  also  became  necessary  to  prove 
the  incorrectness  of  the  reiterated  statements  of  both  the  Ord- 
nance Department  and  the  contractors.  After  a visit  to  Wash- 
ington and  absorbing  the  breath  of  official  atmosphere,  the  presi- 
dent and  the  inspector  of  the  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Com- 
pany had  recalled  to  their  recollection — without  a record  be- 
fore them— that  in  filling  one  contract,  and  in  violation  of  its 
provisions,  they  had  manufactured  a small  part  of  the  alloy  of 
the  composition  as  found  by  the  chemical  analysis;  and  it  was 
also  claimed  that  this  particular  lot  of  cartridges  had,  by 
chance,  fallen  into  the  hands  of  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  at 
Fort  Niobrara;  but  recollect.  Senators,  that  the  shells  found 
by  Captain  Macklin  at  the  mouth  of  the  alley  the  morning 
after  the  firing,  almost  before  daylight,  did  not  belong  with  the 
bullets  made  by  the  Union  Metallic  Cartridge  Company.  The 
bullet  taken  from  the  post  in  front  of  Crixell’s  saloon  did  not 
prove  to  be  a steel-jacketed  bullet,  such  as  were  in  use  by  the 
trooifs,  neither  was  it  a guard-cartridge  bullet,  which  also  were 
of  different  composition  from  that  disclosed  by  the  analysis. 

COURSE  OF  BULLETS, 

For  the  purpose  of  investigation,  and  to  ascertain,  if  possible, 
the  position  from  which  the  bullets  found  in  the  houses  were 
fired.  Lieutenant  Leckie  was  detailed  by  General  McCaskey, 
department  commander,  and  visited  Brownsville  and  made  a 
critical  and  expert  examination  in  the  ease  of  every  house  fired 
upon  and  reached  the  conclusion  that  all  the  shots  fired  into 
houses  in  the  near  vicinity  of  the  reservation  were  fired  from 
the  street,  and  could  not  possibly  have  been  fired  from  the  wall 
of  the  reservation  or  from  the  porch  of  the  barracks;  but  an- 
other officer  sent  for  the  like  purpose  reached  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent conclusion,  and  I have  no  doubt  if  we  had  continued  to 
send  officers  there  up  to  the  present  day  each  one  looking 
through  a gunshot  hole,  one  or  two  in  line,  depending  upon 
his  own  height,  possibly,  or  his  ovvii  abilities,  or  the  glance  of 
his  eye,  could  locate  a bullet  and  its  course  in  almost  anj’- 
direction  that  was  wanted.  So  I am  not  going  to  waste  any 
time  on  that  part  of  it. 

MAJOR  PEXROSE^S  CIIAXGE  OP  OPINION. 

After  listening  to  the  evidence  given  at  the  Penrose  court- 
martial  and  reading  the  evidence  presented  to  your  committee. 
Major  Penrose  renewed  his  first  impression  that  his  command 
was  not  involved  in  the  affray,  as  testified  by  him. 

Hearings,  volume  3,  pages  3025-3026 : 

Q.  I want  to  know  fully  what  produced  this  change  in  your  mind, 
in  your  opinion,  as  to  who  did  that  shooting? — A.  I am  trying  to 
give  it  to  you.  Senator.  There  was  another  question  or  two  asked  of 
me,  if  you  will  remember. 

Q.  I want  you  to  explain  it  fully  in  your  own  way. — A.  Yes,  sir. 
Well,  as  I say,  the  darkness  of  this  night  and  the  finding  of  those 
shells — my  opinion  commenced  to  change  at  that  time.  Then  there 
was  the  testimony  that  was  produced  before  this  committee  as  to  the 
experiment  that  Avas  made  at  the  Frankford  Arsenal,  where  they  found 
that  eleven  shells  were  fired  from  one  gun. 

Senator  Foraker.  A Springfield? 

A.  One  Springfield  rifle  that  had  been  locked  up  in  the  arms  chest 
at  Fort  Niobrara  and  was  not  opened  until  tlie  morning  of  the  14th  of 
August.  They  claim  that  eleven — I think  it  is  eleven — of  those  shells,  or 
eleven  shells,  fired  from  that  gun.  were  found  in  the  streets  of  Browns- 
ville. Those  shells  were  brought  down  from  Fort  Niobrara  to  Browns- 
4181G— 7738 


79 


ville.  They  were  open,  on  the  back  porch  of  B Company.  They  were 
open  there  several  days.  I don’t  remember  how  Ions?.  I can  see  no  way 
in  the  world  that  those  shells  could  have  been  fired  in  the  streets  of 
Brownsville.  There  is  another  thing : I think  thev  were  taken  out 
there  and  put  there.  That  is  the  reason  that  I 'have  changed  my 
opinion,  sir. 

By  Senator  Lodge  : 

Q.  You  think  those  shells  were  put  all  over  the  town  in  order  to 
give  the  idea  that  the  soldiers  did  the  shooting? — A.  I think  certainly 
those  eleven  shells  were,  sir. 

Q.  Well,  but  it  is  in  testimony  and,  I think,  uncontradicted,  that 
shells  were  picked  up  at  a great  many  points? — A.  Yes,  sir;  so  I under- 
stand. 

Q.  Your  idea  is  that  they  must  have  been  put  there,  at  all  those 
points? — A.  That  is  my  idea  of  it,  sir. 

By  Senator  Oveuman  : 

Q.  Do  you  think  those  freshly  fired  shells  that  v/ere  found  there  at 
the  mouth  of  the  alley  were  brought  down  from  Niobrara?— -A.  I think 
so  now. 

Q.  And  put  there? — A.  I believe  they  were,  sir. 

Q.  Yet  you  say  they  were  freshly  fired? — A.  They  had  the  appear- 
ance to  me.  They  had  only  been  fired  a month  before. 

By  Senator  Taliafeeko  : 

Q.  Who  do  you  think  brought  them  from  Niobrara?- — A.  B Company 
brought  them  down, 

Q.  Who  do  you  think  distributed  them  in  the  streets? — A.  I don’t 
know,  sir,  unless  some  of  the  people  of  Brownsville. 

Q.  How  did  they  get  out  of  the  custody  of  B Company?— A.  They 
were  open  on  the  back  porch  of  B Company,  and  w^ere  left  there  for 
several  days,  Senator — this  box  was.  I think  the  testimony  so  shows 
here. 

Q.  They  were  at  least  more  accessible  to  the  members  of  B Company 
than  they  were  to  the  public  at  large? — A.  Yes,  sir  ; that  would  be  very 
possible — that  they  were. 

Senator  Scott.  I should  like  to  hear  the  answer  to  Senator  Pettus’s 
question,  if  I can  get  it. 

. By  the  Chairman  : 

Q.  If  you  have  anything  further  to  say  in  answer  to  the  question 
of  the  Senator  from  Alabama,  you  will,  of  course,  proceed  with  it 
and  make  full  answer. — A.  I should  state  in  connection  with  that  that 
there  was  the  behavior  of  the  men  before  this  shooting  occurred.  They 
had  been  an  excellent  lot  of  men.  We  had  never  had  any  trouble  with 
them  ; they  were  well  disciplined,  well  drilled,  easy  to  handle.  From 
the  time  that  this  shooting  occurred  none  of  them  was  permitted  to 
leave  Fort  Brown  at  all.  We  took  them  up  to  Fort  Reno,  Okla.,  and 
there  they  were  confined  absolutely  to  the  limits  of  the  post — the  post 
proper.  They  were  not  permitted  to  leave  it  under  any  circumstances. 
I gave  them  extra  drills,  extra  guard,  and  had  them  working  at  fatigue 
whenever  they  were  not  drilling  or  on  guard,  the  whole  day  long.  Those 
men  took  all  that  without  a murmur  or  a complaint  of  any  kind.  There 
were  five  of  the  men  who  disobeyed  that  order  and  went  to  town.  They 
were  each  tried,  dishonorably  discharged,  and  sentenced  to  eighteen 
months’  confinement  at  the  military  prison  at  Fort  Leavenworth,  Kans., 
and  that  was  reduced  by  the  reviewing  authority  to  six  months.  Those 
five  exceptions  were  the  only  ones  that  disobeyed  any  of  the  orders  that 
were  issued  at  all.  Finally  the  order  came  for  their  discharge.  They 
wore  discharged  at  that  post,  a half  a company  at  a time.  They  were 
paid  off.  They  had  anywhere  from  fifty  or  sixty  dollars  to,  some  of 
them,  twelve  or  thirteen  hundred  dollars.  They  went  to  this  little  town, 
which  was  full  of  temptations,  and,  as  I stated  before,  there  was  not  a 
single  man  found  drunk,  nor  was  there  a disturbance  of  any  kind  or 
character  reported  of  these  men,  and  I talked  with  the  chief  of  police 
over  the  telephone  frequently.  Now,  taking  into  consideration  the  con- 
duct of  these  men  both  before  and  afterwards,  and  what  I have  before 
stated,  leads  me  to  believe  that  the  men  did  not  do  that  shooting. 

The  Senator  from  Idaho  has  noted  the  absence  of  a number 
of  men  from  the  post  that  night,  apparently  imacconnted  for 
(and  my  attention  has  been  called  to  the  fact),  when  api)ai-ently 
all  of  the  men  are  reported  present.  There  are  some  Senators 
ill  this  Chamber  who  are  familiar  from  their  own  experience 
4181 G— 7738 


80 


with  the  usual  report  of  a first  sergeant  after  a roll  call.  They 
haA^e  heard  the  report  made  after  a great  battle,  in  which  many 
Avere  nnaccoiinted  for,  except  as  they  lay  prone  on  the  battle- 
field and  could  ansAver  to  but  one  call.  The  usual  report  of 
a first  sergeant  is,  “All  present  or  accounted  for,”  and  he  ac- 
counts for  the  men  who  are  absent  either  on  a pass,  as  it  is 
his  duty  to  knoAA%  detailed  for  guard  duty,  or  located  elsewhere. 
And  these  men,  the  record  sIioavs,  as  I find  it  in  the  Senator’s 
speech,  reading  from  the  Kecord  : 

I call  attention  to  another  matter  in  this  affair.  The  record  shows 
that — 

Ih'ivate  Lee  stayed  the  night  at  a house  in  the  city.  AiVas  out  that 
night.  (S.  Doc.,  p.  128.) 

Private  E.  Johnson  (p.  132)  stayed  that  night  in  town  with  his 
Avife. 

Private  G.  Johnson  (p.  120)  was  sleeping  at  the  corral  and  knew 
nothing  about  the  matter  until  he  was  told  about  it  afterwards. 

Private  John  Streater  (p.  134)  was  asleep  in  the  corral.  Never 
knew  anything  about  it. 

I’rivate  G.  Thomas  (p.  117)  was  at  a colored  woman’s  house  in 
Brownsville  and  did  not  return  until  the  next  morning. 

Private  Hardin  (p.  131)  was  absent  from  the  quarters,  sleeping  at 
Lieutenant  Higgins's  quarters,  and  did  not  appear  until  the  next 
morning. 

Private  Turner  (p.  135)  was  absent  from  the  quarters,  sleeping  at 
Lieutenant  Hayes’s. 

I’rivate  Kirkpatrick  (p.  133)  was  in  the  hospital. 

I’rivate  John  Brown  (p.  151)  was  asleep  in  the  baker  shop. 

Ihivate  Elmer  BroAvn  (p.  151)  was  asleep  in  the  corral. 

Private  Newton  (p.  140)  was  asleep  in  the  quarters  of  Lieutenant 
“W^est. 

Private  Jones  (p.  139)  was  asleep  in  Captain  Lyon’s  quarters. 

Private  Mapp  (p.  141)  was  asleep  in  the  bake  shop. 

Private  Halley  (p.  144)  was  asleep  in  the  corral. 

Private  John  Henry  (p.  144)  was  in  the  quartermaster’s  corral. 

Private  Charles  W.  Hawkins  (p.  140)  was  in  tov/n  on  a pass. 

In  addition  to  these  absentees  there  were  absent  on  duty  within  the 
post  at  the  guardhouse  four  noncommissioned  officers. 

Private  Miller  was  out  on  a pass. 

I haA’C  heard,  and  other  Senators  hat^e  heard,  a thousand 
times  the  report  of  the  first  sergeant — “All  present  or  accounted 
for.”  The  Senator  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Dick]  in  his  oaaui  AA^ay  and 
in  his  OAvn  experience  has  heard  it. 

I knoAA^  that  I have  already  wearied  the  Senate,  but  I have 
felt  compelled  to  quote  freely  from  the  record  evidence  and 
have  draAvn  only  from  the  testimony  to  sustain  my  conclusions 
and  belief  that  each  and  every  member  of  this  battalion  of  the 
Twenty-fifth  Infantry  is  absolutely  innocent  of  the  charge  of 
shooting  up  the  city  of  BroAvnsville  and,  consequently,  all  are 
guiltless  of  any  “ conspiracy  of  silence,”  for  Avhich  reasons  they 
were  discharged  Avithout  honor  in  November,  1906 ; and  for  these 
reasons  I joined  Avith  my  colleagues  from  West  Virginia,  Ohio, 
and  Indiana  in  the  minority  report  of  your  committee  and  the 
supplemental  report  attached  thereto  signed  by  the  Senator 
from  Ohio  and  myself. 

I should  feel,  Mr.  President  and  Senators,  that  I had  fallen 
short  of  my  duty  if  I failed  to  record  here  the  lionorable  record 
of  the  TAventy-fifth  United  States  Infantry,  as  Avell  as  that  of 
the  TAventy-fourth,  and  the  Ninth  and  Tenth  Cavalry,  for  they 
all  do  honor  to  the  United  States  Army,  in  Avhich  they  appear 
not  only  as  soldiers,  but  as  Avorthy  representatives  of  their 
race.  l ask  to  include  here,  Avithout  reading,  the  official  records 
as  furnished  me  by  the  IVar  Department. 

4181G— 7738 


81 


OFFICIAL  RECORD  OF  THE  TWENTY-FIFTH  REGIMENT,  UNITED  STATES 

INFANTRY. 

The  Twenty-fifth  Regiment  of  Infantry  was  organized  April  20,  1869, 
by  the  consolidation  of  the  Thirty-ninth  and  Fortieth  Regiments  of 
Infantry,  under  the  act  approved  March  :>,  1869.  From  April,  1869, 
to  May,  1870,  the  regiment  served  in  Louisiana  and  Mississippi.  From 
May,  1870,  to  May,  1880,  it  was  stationed  in  Texas  along  the  Rio 
Grande  frontier.  A part  of  the  regiment  was  sent  to  the  Indian  Terri- 
tory in  1872,  serving  there  to  May,  1880,  when  the  entire  regiment  was 
sent  to  South  Dakota.  It  garrisoned  posts  on  the  Missouri  River  to 
May,  1888,  four  companies  being  stationed  at  Fort  Snelling,  Minn., 
from  November,  1882,  to  May,  1888,  when  the  entire  regiment  was  sent 
to  Montana,  serving  there  until  April,  1898.  It  was  stationed  at 
Chickamauga  Park,  Ga.,  to  May,  1898  ; at  Tampa,  Fla.,  to  June,  1898  ; 
in  Cuba,  participating  in  the  Santiago  camjiaign,  to  August,  1898  ; in 
New  York  to  September,  1898,  and  in  Arizona  and  New  Mexico,  to 
June,  1899. 

Four  additional  companies  were  organized  at  Fort  Logan,  Colo.,  in 
October,  1898,  and  served  there  to  June,  1899,  when  the  headquarters 
and  eight  companies  left  for  the  Philippine  Islands,  the  remaining  four 
companies  being  stationed  in  Arizona  and  Texas  to  September,  1900, 
when  they  were  sent  to  the  Philippine  Islands. 

The  entire  regiment  returned  to  the  United  States  in  August,  1902, 
headquarters  and  eight  companies  being  sent  to  Fort  Niobrara,  Nebr., 
and  four  companies  to  Fort  Reno,  Okla.  Two  companies  were  on  tem- 
porary duty  at  Fort  Des  Moines,  Iowa,  from  December,  1903,  to  April, 
1904. 

On  July  23,  1906.  headquarters  and  four  companies  were  sent  from 
Fort  Reno,  Okla.,  to  Fort  Bliss,  Tex.,  v/here  they  are  now  stationed. 
Four  companies  left  Fort  Niobrara,  Nebr.,  for  Fort  McIntosh,  Tex.,  on 
the  same  date,  and  are  now  stationed  there.  Companies  B,  C,  and  D 
of  the  regiment  left  Fort  Niobrara,  Nebr.,  July  23  ; arrived  at  Fort 
Brown,  Tex.,  July  28,  1906,  and  left  for  Fort  Reno,  Okla.,  August  25, 
1906.  Company  A was  on  temporary  duty  at  Fort  Washakie,  Wyo., 
from  April  1 to  September  7,  1906,  when  it  left  for  its  present  station. 
Fort  Reno,  Okla. 

ACTIONS,  ETC.,  IN  V/HICH  THE  REGIMENT  OR  PORTIONS  THEREOF  HAVE 
PARTICIPATED. 

Melvin  Station,  Tex.,  May  21,  1871  ; Central  Station,  Tex.,  July  28, 
1872 ; Eagle  Springs,  .Tex.,  April  27,  1873 ; Central  Station.  Tex., 
October  1,  1873;  Carrizo  Mountains,  Tex.,  May  18,  1874;  Wichita 
Agency,  Ind.  T.,  August  22  and  23,  1874 ; Carrizo  Mountains,  Tex., 
February  18,  1876 ; Mackenzie’s  expedition  into  Mexico,  June,  1878 ; 
near  Salt  Lake,  Tex.,  July  25,  1879 ; Santiago  campaign,  June  and 
July,  1898;  El  Caney,  Cuba,  July  1,  1898:  San  Juan  Hill,  Cuba,  July 

1-3,  1898 ; near  San  Mateo,  P.  I.,  August  12,  1899 ; near  La  Loma, 

P.  L,  October  9,  1899 ; O’Donnell,  P.  I..  November  18.  1899  ; San 
Fernando  de’Rivera,  P.  I.,  December  7,  1899 ; Botolon,  P.  I.,  Decem- 
ber 8,  1899  : Iba,  P.  I.,  December  9,  1899,  and  January  1,  1900  ; Co- 
mansi  and  Iba,  P.  I.,  January  5 and  6,  1900  ; Mabalacat,  P.  L,  Janu- 
ary 6,  1900 ; near  Castillejos,  P.  I.,  Januai-y  29,  1900 ; Tawi  Tawi 
Island,  P.  I.,  January  29,  1900 ; Subig,  P.  I.,  February  9,  1900 ; 

Botolon,  P.  I.,  February  18,  1900  : near  Botolon,  P.  I.,  February  22. 

1000 ; Candelaria,  I*.  I.,  May  6,  1900  ; Palauig,  P.  I..  May  13,  1900 ; 
Cabangan,  P.  L,  July  15,  1900  ; near  San  Antonio.  P.  I..  September  18, 
1900  ; Subig,  P.  I.,  September  18,  22,  and  23,  1900  ;.  Castille.ios,  P.  I., 
September  25,  1000 ; near  Castillejos,  P.  I.,  October  25,  1900 ; near 
Subig,  P.  I.,  November  10,  1900  ; near  Equia,  P.  I.,  February  24,  1901  ; 
near  Botolon,  1*.  I.,  July  2,  1901. 

The  regiment  lost  in  Cuba — 1 officer  and  7 men  killed  and  3 officers 
and  27  men  wounded  ; and  in  the  Philippine  Islands,  1 officer  aud  8 
men  killed  and  22  men  v/ounded. 

OFFICIAL  RECORD  OF  THE  TWENTY-FOURTH  REGIMENT  UNITED  STATES 

INFANTRY. 

This  regiment  was  organized  November  11,  1869,  by  the  consolidation 
of  the  Thirty-eighth  and  Forty-first  regiments  of  Infantry,  as  provided 
for  under  the  act  of  March  3,  1869. 

It  served  in  ’Texas  from  November,  1869,  to  December,  1880;  in  the 
Indian  Territory  to  May,  1888;  in  New  Mexico  and  Arizona  to  October, 
1896;  in  Utah  to  Ajiril,  1898;  in  Florida  to  June,  1898;  in  Cuba  to 
September,  1899;  in  Utah  and  Y'yoming  1o  May,  1899;  in  California  to 
July,  1899;  in  the  I’hilippine  Islands  to  August,  1902  (four  compa- 
nies remained  in  Wa.shington,  Alaska,  arul  Montana  to  August,  1J)02)  ; 
in  Montana  from  August,  11)02.  to  January,  1906;  in  the  Philipiihie 
Islands  to  February.  1908,  aud  is  now  eii  route  to  the  United  States 
since  February  15,  1908,  and  is  to  lake  station  at  posts  in  New  York. 

41816—7738 -6 


82 


ACTIONS,  ETC.,  IN  WHICH  THE  REGIMENT  OR  PORTIONS  THEREOF  HAVE 
PARTICIPATED. 

Scout  on  the  Rio  Grande  and  Pecos,  Tex.,  January  8 to  February 
G,  1870  ; near  Fort  McKavett,  Tex.,  July  31,  1871 ; near  Fort  McKavett, 
Tex.,  September  1,  1871 ; on  the  La  Pendencia,  Tex.,  May  20,  1872 ; 
near  Rattlesnake  Springs,  Tex.,  August  6,  1880  ; Cedar  Springs,  Ariz., 
May  11,  1889  ; operations  against  Santiago,  Cuba,  June  22  to  July  17, 
1898;  San  .Juan  Hill,  Cuba,  July  1 to  3,  1898;  San  Mateo,  P.  I.,  Au- 
gust 12,  1899;  near  Mexico,  P.  I.,  September  27,  1899;  Santa  A^a, 
P.  I.,  October  6,  1899  ; St.  Augustin,  P.  I.,  October  7,  1899  ; Arayat, 
P,  I.,  October  12,  1899  ; San  Luis,  P.  I.,  December  3,  1899  ; Naguillian, 
P.  I.,  December  7,  1899  ; Talavera  road,  P.  I.,  December  28,  1899 ; 
Bongabong,  P.  I.,  December  29,  1899  ; near  Aliaga,  P.  I.,  Februray  11, 
1900  ; near  San  Vincente,  P.  I..  April  4,  1900  ; near  San  Quintan,  P.  I., 
May  5,  1900  ; near  Lupao,  P.  1.,  July  3,  1900  ; Maniclin,  P.  I.,  .July  4, 
1900  ; near  Talavera,  P.  I.,  July  31,  1900  ; near  Manicling,  P.  I.,  Sep- 
tember 13,  1900  ; near  Buloe,  P.  I.,  October  10,  1900  ; Pinog,  P.  -I.,  Oc- 
tober 14,  1900  ; Tabontabon,  P.  I.,  July  24,  190G  : Guelern  Barrio,  P.  I., 
August  17,  190G ; Anibongan,  P.  I.,  September  10,  190G ; Mount  Lobi, 
P.  I.,  September  15,  1906. 

OFFICIAL  RECORD  OF  THE  NINTH  UNITED  STATES  CAVALRY. 

Organized  under  the  act  of  July  28,  1866,  and  was  raised  mainly  in 
Louisiana  and  from  recruits  in  Kentucky.  It  served  in  Louisiana  to 
April,  1867  ; in  Texas  to  December,  1875  ; in  New  Mexico  to  November, 
1881  ; in  Kansas,  Indian  Territory,  and  Texas  to  April,  1885  ; in  Ne- 
braska and  Wyoming  to  April,  1898  ; in  Florida  and  in  Cuba  to  Au- 
gust, 1898  ; in  New  York  to  October,  1898 ; in  Arizona  and  Utah  to 
August,  1900  ; in  Philippine  Islands  to  October,  1902  ; in  California  and 
Washington  to  October,  1904  ; in  Kansas  and  Missouri  to  March,  1907, 
and  since  then  in  the  Philippine  Islands. 

ACTIONS,  ETC.,  IN  WHICH  THE  REGIMENT,  OR  PORTIONS  THEREOF,  HAVE 
PARTICIPATED. 

Howards  Vrell,  Tex.,  October  1,  1867  ; Eagle  Springs,  Tex.,  December 
5,  1867  ; near  Fort  Lancaster,  Tex.,  December  20,  1867  ; Fort  Quitman, 
Tex.,  January,  1868 ; Horse  Head  Hills,  Tex.,  September  14,  1868 ; 
Mulberry  Creek,  Kans.,  January  29,  1869  ; Pecos  and  Johnson  Rivers, 
Tex.,  June  7,  1869 ; Salt  Fork  of  Brazos  River,  Tex.,  September  IG, 
1869  ; Brazos  River,  Tex.,  September  20  and  21,  1869  ; headwaters  of 
Brazos  River,  Tex.,  October  28  and  29,  1869 ; headwaters  of  Llano 
River,  Tex.,  November  24,  1869 ; Johnsons  Mail  Station,  Tex.,  Decem- 
ber 25,  1869  ; scout  on  Rio  Grande  and  Pecos,  Tex.,  January  8 to  Feb- 
ruary 6,  1870;  scout  in  Guadalupe  IMountains,  Tex.,  January  6 to 
February  10,  1870;  Delaware  Creek,  Tex..  January  20,  1870;  San  IMar- 
tine  Springs,  Tex.,  April  3,  1870;  Crow  Springs,  Tex.,  April  25,  1870; 
Kickapoo  Springs,  Tex.,  May  19  and  20,  1870  ; Bass  Canyon,  Tex.,  May 
29,  1870;  Staked  Plains,  Tex.,  June  30,  1871;  headwaters  of  Concho 
River,  Tex.,  July  22,  1871;  near  Fort  McKavett,  Tex.,  July  3L  18(1; 
near  Fort  McKavett,  Tex.,  September  1,  1871  ; Howards  Well,  Tex., 
April  20,  1872;  on  the  La  Pendencia,  Tex.,  May  20,  1872;  near  Fort 
Sill,  Ind.  T.,  October  4,  1874  ; near  Ringgold  Barracks,  Tex.,  January 
20,  1875 ; near  Ringgold  Barracks,  Tex.,  January  27,  1875 ; Florida 
Mountains,  N.  Mex.,  September  15,  1876;  Florida  Mountains,  N.  Jdex.. 
January  23,  1877 ; Sierra  Bccas  Grande,  Mexico,  January  28,  1877 ; 
Dog  Canyon,  N.  Mex.,  August  5,  1878;  Cormedos  Mountains,  N.  Mex., 
January  15,  1879;  Ojo  Caliente,  N.  Mex.,  March  8,  1879;  Black  Range 
of  Miembres  Mountains,  N.  Mex.,  May  29,  1879  ; O.io  Caliente,  N.  Mex., 
September  4,  1879  ; Las  Animas  River,  N.  Mex.,  September  18,  1879  ; 
near  O.io  Caliente,  N.  Mex.,  September  28,  1879 ; near  Canada  Ala- 
mosa, N.  INIex.,  September  30,  1879;  Cuchillo  Negro  Mountains,  N.  Mex., 
September  29  to  October  1,  1879  ; Milk  River,  Colo.,  October  2 to  5, 
1879;  White  River,  Colo.,  October  10,  1879;  San  Guzman  Mountains, 
Mexico,  October  27,  1879 ; Rio  Puerco,  N.  Mex.,  January  12,  1880 ; 
San  Mateo  Mountains,  N.  Mex.,  January  17,  1880  ; Cabello  Mountains, 
N.  Mex.,  January  30,  1880 ; San  Andreas  Mountains,  N.  lilex.,  Feb- 
ruary 3,  1880 ; Sacramento  IMountains,  N.  Mex.,  February  28,  1880 ; 
San  Andreas  IMountains,  N.  Mex.,  April  5,  1880  ; San  Andreas  Moun- 
tains, N.  Mex.,  April  G to  9,  1880  ; camp  near  South  Fork,  N.  Mex., 
April  16,  1880  ; Mescalero  Agency,  N.  Mex.,  April  IG,  1880  ; near  Dog 
Canyon,  N.  Mex.,  April  17,  1880 ; Tularosa,  N.  ISiex.,  May  14,  1880  ; 
Cooks  Canyon,  N.  Mex.,  June  5,  1880;  Aqua  Chiquita,  N.  Mex.,  Sep- 
tember 1,  1880  ; near  Canada  Alamosa,  N.  IMex.,  January  24,  1881  ; 
Candelaria  Mountains,  Mexico,  February  5,  1881  ; Mexican  line  near 
Fort  Cummings,  N.  Mex.,  April  29,  1881  ; Alamo  Canyon,  N.  5Iex.,  July 
17,  1881  ; Arena  Blanca,  N.  Mex.,  July  19,  1881  ; White  Sands,  N.  Mex., 
41816—7738 


83 


July  25,  1881 ; San  Andreas  Mountains,  N.  Mex.,  July  2G,  1881 ; Monica 
Springs,  N.  Mex.,  August  3,  1881 ; Carrizo  Canyon,  N.  Mex.,  August  12, 
1881  ; Rio  Cuchillo  Negro,  N.  Mex.,  August  IG,  1881  ; near  San  Mateo 
Mountains,  N.  Mex.,  August  IG,  1881  ; jSIcEwer’s  Ranch,  N.  Mex.,  Au- 
gust 19.  1881  ; South  Pass  of  Dragoon  Mountains,  Ariz.,  October  4, 
1881  ; Crow  Agency,  Mont.,  November  5,  1887 ; near  Pine  Ridge 
Agency,  S,  Dak.,  December  30,  1890  ; Drexel  or  Catholic  Mission,  near 
White  Clay  Creek,  S.  Dak.,  December  30,  1890  ; operations  against  San- 
tiago, Cuba,  June  22  to  July  17,  1898  ; San  Juan  Hill,  Cuba,  July  1 
to  3,  1898  ; near  Palanog,  P.  I.,  October  7,  1900  ; Tagilag,  P.  I.,  Octo- 
ber 9,  1900 ; near  Pasacao,  P.  I.,  October  11,  1900 ; Tagilag,  P.  I., 

October  11,  1900 ; Camalig.  P.  I..  October  IG.  1900 ; Camalig,  P.  I., 

October  18,  1900  ; Tagilag,  P.  I.,  October  19,  1900  ; near  Tagitay,  P,  I., 

October  2G,  1900  ; near  Rurug,  P.  I.,  October  28,  1900  ; Tagilag,  P.  I., 

October  29,  1900  : Camalig,  P.  I.,  November  2,  1900  ; near  Libog,  P.  I., 

November  14,  1900 ; near  Florista,  P.  I.,  November  24,  1900 ; Ban- 
tonan,  P.  I.,  November  24,  1900 ; Umban,  P.  I.,  November  2G,  1900 ; 
Guinobatan,  P.  I.,  December  2,  1900 ; near  Guinobatan,  P.  I.,  Decem- 
ber 6,  1900  ; near  Guinobatan.  P.  I.,  December  15,  1900  ; near  Guino- 
batan, P.  I.,  December  17.  1900;  near  Guinobatan,  P.  I.,  December  19, 

1900  ; Ogson  Barrio,  P.  I.,  December  27.  1900  ; near  Camaligan,  P.  I.. 
December  30,  1900  ; near  IMinalabac,  P.  I..  January  2,  1901  ; near  Bali- 
gan,  I*.  I.,  January  4,  1901  ; near  Bololo,  P.  I..  January  7,  1901  : near 
Bololo.  I*.  I..  January  22,  1901  ; near  Sipocot,  P.  I.,  January  2G,  1901  ; 
near  San  Isidro,  P.  I.,  January  27,  1901  ; near  Bololo,  P.  1.,  January 
31,  1901  ; San  Fernando  Mountains,  P.  I.,  February  9,  1901  ; Bubsoaii, 
P.  I.,  February  15,  1901  ; near  Guinobatan,  P.  I.,  February  IG,  1901  ; 
Tagitay,  P.  I.,  February  22,  1901  ; near  Bulason,  P.  I.,  February  25, 

1901  ; near  Bonga,  P.  I.,  February  2G,  1901  ; near  Tinambag,  P.  I., 
March  18,  1901  ; near  Tinambag,  I*.  I.,  March  22,  1901  ; Bonga  River, 
P.  I.,  March  28.  1901  ; near  Lumagan,  P.  I.,  May  9,  1901  ; near  Ragav, 
P.  1.,  Mav  12,  1901;  near  Lupi.  1’.  I.,  May  13,  1901;  Guinobatan,  P.  I.. 
May  15,  1901  ; Tanarg,  P.  I.,  May  19,  1901  ; Mataray.  P.  I.,  May  22, 
1901  ; near  Alit,  1*.  T.,  May  22,  1901  ; Ragay,  P.  I.,  May  27,  1901  ; near 
Catbalogan,  P.  I..  May  27.  1901  ; Gandara  River,  P.  I.,  May  30,  1901  ; 
near  Ragay,  P.  I.,  May  31,  1901  ; near  Donsol.  P.  I.,  June  4,  1901  ; 
River  Bonga,  P.  I..  June  27,  1901  ; Mutiong,  I‘.  I.,  July  IG,  1901  ; near 
Mutiong,  P.  I.,  July  23,  1901  ; near  Gapo,  P.  I.,  November  12,  1901  ; 
near  San  Luis,  P.  I.,  February  G,  1902. 

OFFICIAL  KECOP.O  OF  THE  TENTH  REGIMENT  UNITED  .STATES  CAVALRY. 

Regiment  was  organized  under  the  act  of  July  28,  18G6.  Head- 
quarters of  the  regiment  was  established  at  Fort  Leavenworth,  Kans.,  in 
August,  18GG,  and  regiment  was  mainly  recruited  in  Kansas  and  in 
other  adjoining  States.  The  organization  of  the  regiment  was  not 
fully  completed  until  the  spring  and  summer  of  18G7. 

The  regiment  served  in  Kansas  and  Indian  Territory  from  18GG  to 
Mav,  1873  ; in  Texas  and  Indian  Territory  to  April,  1885  ; in  Arizona 
and  New  Mexico  to  ISIay,  1892  ; in  Dakota  and  Montana  to  April,  1898  ; 
in  Georgia  and  Florida  to  June,  1898  ; in  Culia  to  August,  1898  ; in 
New  York  to  October,  1898  ; in  Alabama  to  January,  1899  ; in  Texas  to 
April,  1899;  in  Cuba  to  April,  1902  (four  troops  served  in  Philippine 
Islands  from  April,  1901,  to  August.  1902)  ; in  Nebraska  and  Wyo- 
ming to  Ylarch,  1907,  and  since  then  in  the  Philippine  Islands. 

ACTION.S  IN  WHICH  THE  REGIMENT  OR  PORTIONS  THEREOF  HAVE  PAR- 
TI Cl  FATED. 

Saline  River.  Kans.,  August  2,  18G7 ; Prairie  Dog  Creek,  Kans., 
August  21  to  22.  18G7  ; Saline  River,  Kans.,  September  IG,  18G7  ; Big 
Sandy  Creek,  Colo.,  September  15,  18G8  ; Beaver  Creek,  Kans.,  October 
18,  l8G8 ; near  Fort  Dodge,  Kans.,  November  19,  18G8 ; near  Clear 
Creek,  Tex.,  April  G,  1870;  near  Camp  Supply,  Ind.  T.,  Jun.e  9',  1870; 
Snake  Creek.  Ind.  T.,  June  10,  1870;  Camp  Supply,  Ind.  T.,  June  11, 

1870  ; Fort  Sill,  Ind.  T.,  April  27,  1871  ; near  Red  River,  Tex.,  Pilay  12, 

1871  ; Fort  Sill,  Ind.  T.,  May  17,  1871  ; Foster  Springs,  Ind.  T.,  Septem- 
ber 19.  1871  ; Deep  River,  Ind.  T.,  July  12,  1872  ; Otter  Creek,  Ind.  T., 
July  22,  1872;  near  Pea.se  River,  Tex.,  August  31,  1873;  Flra  Creek, 
Tex.,  December  5,  1873;  Home  Creek,  Tex.,  February  2,  1874;  Double 
Mountain,  Tex.,  February  5,  1874;  between  Red  River  and  Big  Wichita, 
Tex.,  May  2,  1874  ; Wichita  Agency,  Ind.  T.,  August  22  to  23,  1874  ; ex- 
pedition from  Fort  Sill,  Ind.  T.,  October  21  to  November  8,  1874  ; North 
Fork  of  Canadian  River,  Ind.  T..  December  20,  1874  ; near  Cheyenne 
Agency,  Ind.  T.,  Ajiril  G.  1875;  Battle  Point.  3’ex..  May  5,  1875;'  near 
Pecos  River,  Tex.,  November  2,  1875;  near  Saragossa,  Alexico,  July  30, 
187G;  Lake  (^uemado,  Tex.,  May  4,  1877;  near  Saragossa.  Mexico, 
Septemlter  29,  1877  ; Sierra  del  Carmen,  Pdexico,  November  29  to  30, 

4181G— 7738 


8-1- 


1877;  near  Salt  Lake,  Tex.,  July  25.  1879;  Van  Horn  Mountains, 
Tex.,  September  16,  1879  ; near  Pecos  Falls,  Tex.,  April  3,  1880  ; Shake- 
hand  Springs,  Tex.,  April  9,  1880 ; Mescalero  Agency,  N,  Mex.,  April 
16,  1880 ; Sacramento  Mountains,  N.  Mex.,  April  20,  1880 ; Rocky 
Ridge,  Tex.,  July  30,  1880 ; Alamo  Springs,  Tex.,  August  3,  1880 ; 
Camp  Safiford,  Tex.,  August  4,  1880 ; Guadalupe  Mountains,  Tex., 
August  6,  1880  ; near  Rattlesnake  Springs,  Tex..  August  6.  1880  ; Rat- 
tlesnake Canyon,  Tex.,  August  6,  1880  ; Ojo  Caliente,  N.  Mex.,  October 
28,  1880 ; Penito  Mountains,  Mexico,  May,  1880 ; Black  River  Moun- 
tains, Ariz.,  October  18,  1886  ; Rincon  Mountains,  Ariz.,  June  11,  1887  ; 
Cedar  wSprings,  Ariz..  May  11.  1889 ; near  mouth  of  Cherry  Creek, 
Ariz.,  March  7,  1890 ; operations  against  Santiago,  Cuba,  June  22 
to  July  17,  1898 ; Las  Guasimas,  Cuba.  June  24,  1898 ; Tayabacoa, 
Cuba,  June  30,  1898  ; San  Juan  Hill,  Cuba,  July  1 to  3,  1898 ; near 
Calbayog,  P.  I.,  May  27.  1901  ; near  Masalacot,  P.  I.,  February  21,  1902  ; 
near  Quinapundan,  P.  I.,  February  25,  1902  ; near  Quinapundan,  P.  I., 
March  2,  1902  ; near  Quinapundan,  P.  I.,  March  4,  1902  ; near  Quina- 
pundan, P.  I.,  JMarch  5,  1902  ; Mount  Masalacat,  P.  I.,  March  14,  1902  ; 
Quinapundan,  P.  I.,  March  14,  1902  ; near  Quinapundan,  P.  I.,  March 
20.  1902. 

It  is  as  lionorable  a record  of  service  on  tiie  frontier,  in  Cuba, 
and  in  the  Philippines  as  anj'  soldiers  of  the  Army  possess.  If 
character  and  good  service  are  entitled  to  any  consideration  in 
the  case  of  any  accused,  the  good  character  of  these  men,  estab- 
lished by  the  evidence  of  their  own  officers,  their  long,  faith- 
ful, and  honorable  service,  both  in  war  and  in  peace,  entitle 
them  to  oiir  consideration  here. 

The  advent  of  the  negro  soldiers  in  the  Army,  Mr.  President, 
does  not  date  in  these  late  years ; they  were  alike  found  in  the 
ranks  in  colonial  as  well  as  modern  times,  and  history  records 
that  in  the  Boston  massacre,  March  5,  1770,  regarded  as  “ the 
first  act  in  the  drama  of  the  American  Revolution,”  Crispus 
Attucks — not  a soldier,  as  described  by  my  distinguished  friend, 
the  Senator  from  Missouri,  but  a slave — was  the  first  to  fall. 
He  was  buried  from  Faneuil  Hall  with  the  other  victims  of  that 
event.  That  event  is  celebrated  down  to  this  day,  almost  a 
hundred  and  forty  years  since;  for  a long  time  on  the  anni- 
versary of  the  day  it  occurred,  and  after  the  close  of  the  Revo- 
lution on  the  Fourth  of  Julj",  as  the  more  appropriate  day  to  com 
Tuemorate  an  event  which  really  led  up  to  dissolving  the  rela- 
tions with  the  mother  country. 

At  Bunker  Hill  the  shot  which  laid  low  the  British  com- 
mandeer as  he  mounted  the  redoubt  shouting,  “ The  day  is  ours,” 
was  fired  by  Peter  Salem,  once  a negro  slave,  fighting  in  the 
ranks  with  his  white  comrades.  You  will  find  them  brave, 
patriotic,  and  heroic,  both  in  victory  and  defeat,  in  the  eight 
years’  struggle  for  the  new  Republic  from  Bunker  Hill  to  York- 
town. 

In  the  war  of  1812  negroes  formed  their  full  proportion  of 
the  crew  of  the  fleet  under  Commodore  Perry.  A writer  says : 

Perry  speaks  highly  of  the  bravery  and  good  conduct  of  the  negroes 
who  formed  a considerable  part  of  his  crew.  They  seemed  absolutely 
insensible  to  danger. 

Another,  Commander  Shaler,  says : 

The  name  of  one  of  my  poor  fellows  ought  to  be  registered  in  the 
book  of  fame. 

In  the  civil  war  negro  troops  could  be  found  in  both  armies 
as  they  followed  the  flag  of  the  contending  hosts  with  loyalty 
until  the  surrender  at  Appomattox. 

In  the  war  with  Spain  the  regiments  of  colored  troops  of  the 
Regular  Army  were  at  the  fi’ont  in  almost  every  engagement, 
and  at  the  surrender  the  Twenty-fifth  Infantry  and  the  Tenth 
41816—7738 


85 

Cavalry  were  accorded  an  honorable  position  in  the  closing 
ceremonies  of  the  war. 

On  the  frontier  of  onr  own  country  and  in  the  newly  acquired 
possessions  of  the  islands  of  the  sea  they  have  filled  their  places 
with  credit  and  honor. 

From  the  conclusion  reached  both  as  to  the  nonparticipation 
of  the  members  of  the  battalion  in  the  shooting  up  of  Browns- 
ville and  the  consequent  injustice  of  their  dismissal  from  the 
Army  without  honor,  and  the  disabilities  carried  with  such  dis- 
missal, I naturally  turn  to  some  proper  means  of  relief  and 
restoration.  The  President,  in  his  last  message  on  this  ques- 
tion, states  that  Executive  authority  has  lapsed  by  reason  of 
the  time  limit  and  that  legislative  action  is  necessary  to  restore 
such  authority.  For  many  months  applications  for  reenlistment 
in  the  Army,  or  for  restoration,  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the 
President  or  with  the  War  Department,  with  the  only  proof  the 
soldiers  could  furnish  of  their  innocence — their  ov;n  afiid.‘ivits 
and  certificates  of  good  character  and  faithful  service  from 
their  officers — but  not  one  has  been  acted  upon.  The  President 
has  repeatedly  called  upon  these  soldiers  to  prove  their  inno- 
cence to  his  satisfaction — to  a mind  already  confirmed  in  con- 
viction of  undoubted  guilt — as  a condition  of  restoration  and 
so  expressed  over  and  over  again.  This  requirement  imposed 
the  additional  burden  of  removing  this  almost  insurmountable 
bias. 

The  bill  S.  G200,  introduced  by  the  Senator  from  Missouri, 
simply  restores  to  the  President  the  povrers  which  have  lapsed 
by  reason  of  time  and  furnish  no  adequate  relief  to  the  soldier, 
but  reenacts  conditions  with  which  it  is  absolutely  impossible 
to  comply. 

The  Congress  has  the  pov/er  under  the  Constitution  “to  raise 
and  support  armies  ” and  “ to  make  rules  for  the  government 
of  the  land  and  naval  forces.”  At  every  session  of  the  Con- 
gress it  is  exercising  these  powers  in  many  ways,  as  in  correct- 
ing military  records  of  soldiers  where  an  apparent  injustice  is 
discovered.  I can  see  no  reasons  v/hy  like  action  can  not  prop- 
erly be  taken  here,  if  the  Congress  is  satisfied  that  the  re- 
sults of  the  long  and  patient  investigations  discloses  the  facts 
as  I have  reviewed  and  as  disclosed  in  the  testimony. 

Mr.  FELTON.  r>Ir.  President,  will  the  Senator  allow  me  just 
a word  right  liere? 

jMr.  BULKELEY.  Certainly. 

Mr.  FUT/rON.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  I have  taken  issue 
with  the  Senator  in  his  conclusions  as  to  whether  or  not  any 
of  these  soldiers  participated  in  this  shooting,  I wish  to  say 
just  a word  at  this  time  as  to  my  views  of  what  should  be 
done. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  I will  be  through  in  a moment.  I should 
like  to  close  up.  I do  not  care  to  bo  interrupted  at  this  time. 

Mr.  FULTON.  I do  not  wish  to  say  anything  if  it  will  in- 
terrupt the  Senator  in  the  course  of  his  speech. 

Idr.  BULKELEY.  I will  be  through  in  about  a moment. 

Mr.  FULTON.  All  right. 

Mr.  BULKELEY.  The  bill  S.  5720,  introduced  by  flie  Sena- 
tor from  Ohio,  protects  the  (hJveriiment  in  the  conditions  im- 
posed for  reenlistmeiit  if  complied  with  and  requires  the  only 
41810—7738 


86 


evidence  outside  of  the  records  of  the  committee’s  investigation 
which  the  soldiers  can  possibly  furnish.  Such  legislation,  I be- 
lieve, is  within  our  power  and  I trust  will  be  enacted  before  the 
close  of  this  Congress. 

Permit  me,  in  closing,  Mr.  President  and  Senators,  to  recall 
the  words  of  a former  commander  of  the  Army,  commenting 
upon  the  efforts  that  were  making  in  the  Congress  to  correct  an 
injustice  to  a high  officer  of  the  Army  during  the  civil  war. 

It  was  during  the  efforts  that  were  made  to  restore  to  the 
Army  Gen.  Fitz-John  Porter,  who  had  been  removed  by  court- 
martial  or  by  order,  and  General  Schofield,  a great  soldier  and 
great  commander,  said,  Schofield’s  Forty  years  in  the  Army, 
pages  465-46G : 

It  suggests  the  reflection  that  even  a Senator  of  the  United  States 
might  better  form  his  own  opinions  rather  than  adopt  those  even  of 
the  highest  authority,  when  the  only  question  involved  is  one  of  jus- 
tice and  not  one  of  public  policy,  in  which  latter  case  differences  of 
opinion  must  of  necessity  he  reconciled  for  the  purpose  of  securing 
unity  of  action. 

Mr.  President,  I do  not  ask  for  these  soldiers  either  pardon  or 
clemency,  but  vindication  from  the  charge  of  crime  for  which 
they  have  been  punished  without  a hearing  or  the  semblance  of 
a trial  by  a civil  or  military  tribunal  and  of  which  I am  con- 
vinced they  are  absolutely  innocent,  but  rather  relief  from  the 
stigma  of  dismissal  from  the  Army  without  honor  and  restora- 
tion to  the  rights  and  privileges  of  which  they  have  been  de- 
prived and  which  can  only  be  restored  to  them  by  the  consid- 
eration and  action  of  the  Congress. 

41816—7733 


PHOTOGRAPH  OF  LARGE  WALL  MAP  USED  IN  THE  COURT  ROOM  AND  REFERRED  TO  IN  THE  RECORD  AS  “THE  MAP.’’ 
Original  map  is  in  oiEce  of  the  judge-advocate,  Department  of  Texas,  Roger  S.  Fitch,  First  Lieut.  First  Cavalry,  J.-A.,  G.  C.  M. 


8T 


O 


# * >!< !}:  # * * * * !i!  )1C  * « )(!  * >[{  5K  )(; ;}:  )K  )C  * * * * 


